One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come?
You can bet on polling.
Like "Labour to have a lead in the polls this calendar year" for example...
The simple truth is that we will swing into a trade war
Do you think the EU will get unanimous agreement to start a trade war on its western border when there are the prospects of a real one on its eastern border?
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
With respect, and I’m sorry if I’m insulting a real human, but your post reads like it’s written by a (spam?)bot.
I accept your apology ping. I am a real human. Why would I want to be a bot?
Apologies if this doesn’t make any sense as well, I can see polling trends. Gaps between leading parties is what makes a headline, but the poll range for a party is more easy to get trend especially, when tracking on just each poll company - for example The Conservatives with Opinium - 15th Oct 41, 29th Oct 40, 6th Nov 37, 12th Nov 36. That’s a trend isn’t it? but what does trend mean in terms of placing a political bet? Nothing clear to me. obvious example is Lib Dem’s who I vote for I see polling double digits more often in polls recently, so do I place a bet because this trend means more blue boxes knocked over taking the mickey the way the Conservatives drove forklift through boxes? The answers no actually, libdems down again in latest polls, that’s the reason against deciding a political bet to quickly isn’t it?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come? I would say no. media stories and fluctuating polling trends may not actually mean anything to actual votes, making it too much of a gamble and not based on betting talent, so I don’t think is very safe type of betting, it’s optimistic punts. Or worse, wishful thinking bets based on your political supporting isn’t it?
The best way to bet on politics is when you notice that the received wisdom isn't in line with the scientific evidence in the form of opinions polls and other surveys. This happens surprisingly often. For example the 2017 election, when most people didn't believe that Labour were going to do as well as they did despite the polls showing it would happen.
Political betting is a big difference in what I do when I’m betting on horses to win, how fast the horse runs, compared to guesses not backed up by knowing any important attributes to understand the obvious political bet. And those polls showing good lib dem trend I might have liked because I am biased, so it’s not objective data making my judgement.A polling trend can’t be backed up by solid science that proves based on something. I can’t imagine betting markets accurately guess political winners, because there is no race course to hang out in learning for yourself how fast the horse will go. Political betting odds may tempt those who are big gamblers, but overall this seems too much guesswork like steeplechase or point to point.
Where do you get the solid science in political betting?
One thing I would look for is signs of strong opinions like record popularity figures. If you realise opinions are particularly strong you could be confident there won’t be last minute swing against your bet based on the strong opinions. Does that make sense, the difference between “I might vote something else this time” and “I’m definitely not voting for them again, they are rubbish.” You can from some responses be more confident what people will actually do. But it’s not the measure getting headlines is it, that is poll lead with lots of I might vote something else next time built in.
There is no solid science in political betting, it’s long shot or spread betting isn’t it?
If Johnson loses one or both by-elections next month I think he'll definitely face a leadership challenge within 12 months. If he holds both of them he's more likely to get through to 2023. Statement of the obvious probably.
Planning a road trip to the Italian Lakes next summer and we fancy coimng back via Austria with a few nights stop somewhere.
I don't know Austria at all, what's our best bet for a stop... Innsbruck? Salzburg? Vienna is a bit out of the way since we have to drive back to the Channel
I saw this from last night - Sean’s suggestion of the South Tyrol was on the money in terms of its attractions, but not necessarily the geography. It depends which lake you are finishing at. If your trip ends at Garda, then heading up through the Brenner can be the way home, and South Tyrol is a great extra stop - Bolzano or Brixen, as he said, or Merano, for a small detour or Ortisei for a moderate detour.
But you’ll still then have a long drive home, too long for a single leg. Tubingen or Freiburg are great spots for an overnight to break the driving. Or Fussen, which is a great stopover, if not that far into the driving.
However if you’re at the western lakes it would obviously be more sensible to come back through Switzerland, and even from Iseo Austria would be a considerable detour. Indeed Garda via Austria is more driving than via France or Switzerland, assuming you’re heading for Calais or similar.
You can buy Austrian motorway passes online provided you do so at least two weeks before the journey.
Swiss don't half rob you to pass through though. Salzberg is beautiful but your suggestion of Fussen area is a good one , it is beautiful around there. Used to weekend in Hohen Schwangau when I was in Munich. @Benpointer
The Swiss are certainly good at fleecing travellers - but then robbing people passing through the Alps has been that country's business model dating back to ancient times.
But the iniquity of the annual pass is really that the Swiss themselves pay so little. If you compare the €40-odd Swiss pass, for doing a single or return trip across the entire country en route from the UK, to the cost you pay on the French motorways for a similar length, it isn't so bad.
I was in Schwangau just two months' back, stayed at the edge of that flat plain just below the castles, with the mountain views, and a great beer garden just along the road. I hope to return on a future trip. I'm sure we all know the closing scenes of the Great Escape, with McQueen being pursued through Alpine countryside on his motorbike - that was all filmed in that area, between Fussen and Pfronten.
It's just the one word - saying "likely" instead of "unlikely".
Yes and how is that spin?
The UK is likely to trigger it and that's being reported across the media not just LauraK.
With the evidence before us, saying unlikely would be spin. How is saying likely spin?
It's unlikely. The "likely" is Johnson/Frost spin. And, yes, it's not just Laura parroting it, it's the whole of the punditry class. Same as they did with "Boris preparing to No Deal" at about this same time last year. We all remember that. A Not Happening Event went odds on fav would you believe. A 'licence to print' for the few astuties.
The only reason it'd be unlikely is if the EU cave on all the UK's demands, just as they did this time last year.
Which is quite probable. But the EU only caved last year because the UK was prepared to No Deal and its the same again this time.
Being prepared to go all in can force the other player off.
You say that the EU caved on all the UK's demands at this time last year. You may be right. But if so, why are we back again asking them to cave on the UK's demands now? Surely they've already caved on everything this time last year? Or is this a different cave?
I understand what you are saying, mispricing exists in horse racing too, where it’s been kept back, hidden away in point to points despite how fast it was when it last raced on course
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
There is much more mispricing in politics than horses/footie and this is a good place to identify it. Most recently, lots of people made a packet in Chesham and Amersham at 20/1, tipped by the site owner.
I identified it as a good value loser, and cashed out a £5 bet for £6.20. Genius decision.
£1.20? Seriously? If I tell you which horse is going to win a hurdles race I would expect more than a five pound bet on it!
I understand what you are saying, mispricing exists in horse racing too, where it’s been kept back, hidden away in point to points despite how fast it was when it last raced on course.
Correct me where I am wrong, you are saying there is money to be made betting against the market, where the market lacks knowledge?
on other hand this may not be completely right, yes if I am sure betting markets are wrong, it means I can bet against them. But not all bets against a market are smart ones, smartest bets are those where you work out who the winner is.When you know what is going to happen and why. And to do that you need to know something.
Is a media narrative founded in something that really matters? Is the media actually objective? If these answers no, it means not only you shouldn’t learn from media but they help you get political betting wrong.
Are opinion polls a measure of public opinion? Not necessarily. For starters it depends if they were scrupulously done to accurate measure of public opinion. And if set up fair are they answered honestly? Not if someone says they don’t know who to vote for despite knowing they will vote and for exactly who. Very honest with you, I done that myself? Sometimes I’m feeling okay to give an opinion sometimes I’m not.
to do good political bets you need to know something, but you can’t trust media or polls to give you that knowledge.
A former associate of the sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein has insisted that he saw Prince Andrew "remove" Virginia Giuffre's "bathing suit top and then start grinding against her" on Epstein's Caribbean island
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
There is much more mispricing in politics than horses/footie and this is a good place to identify it. Most recently, lots of people made a packet in Chesham and Amersham at 20/1, tipped by the site owner.
I identified it as a good value loser, and cashed out a £5 bet for £6.20. Genius decision.
£1.20? Seriously? If I tell you which horse is going to win a hurdles race I would expect more than a five pound bet on it!
I understand what you are saying, mispricing exists in horse racing too, where it’s been kept back, hidden away in point to points despite how fast it was when it last raced on course.
Correct me where I am wrong, you are saying there is money to be made betting against the market, where the market lacks knowledge?
on other hand this may not be completely right, yes if I am sure betting markets are wrong, it means I can bet against them. But not all bets against a market are smart ones, smartest bets are those where you work out who the winner is.When you know what is going to happen and why. And to do that you need to know something.
Is a media narrative founded in something that really matters? Is the media actually objective? If these answers no, it means not only you shouldn’t learn from media but they help you get political betting wrong.
Are opinion polls a measure of public opinion? Not necessarily. For starters it depends if they were scrupulously done to accurate measure of public opinion. And if set up fair are they answered honestly? Not if someone says they don’t know who to vote for despite knowing they will vote and for exactly who. Very honest with you, I done that myself? Sometimes I’m feeling okay to give an opinion sometimes I’m not.
to do good political bets you need to know something, but you can’t trust media or polls to give you that knowledge.
Markets are pretty thin and you will not get much on, so unless you are interested, leave now. EXCEPT, oddly enough, during and even after elections when the markets are deep but driven by wishful thinking, so anyone following polls, exit polls and even early results can cash in.
And just last week, in an admittedly thin market, it was possible to back covid restrictions even after the bookie had all but shouted from the rooftops that they would settle "yes" as the winner.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
One opinion poll won’t make me place a bet. even if I followed trends, does a trend in polling offer any assurance it’s going to go into real votes when election come?
You can bet on polling.
Like "Labour to have a lead in the polls this calendar year" for example...
Yes I could, But I don’t believe it though, but that is a silly bet if it’s too much of a gamble. You can’t trust polls like that. It’s not made up with firm convictions how people will vote. You would have to delve deeper how firm their conviction is, and then you still couldn’t rely on it being accurate science. Do you understand my point.
It's just the one word - saying "likely" instead of "unlikely".
Yes and how is that spin?
The UK is likely to trigger it and that's being reported across the media not just LauraK.
With the evidence before us, saying unlikely would be spin. How is saying likely spin?
It's unlikely. The "likely" is Johnson/Frost spin. And, yes, it's not just Laura parroting it, it's the whole of the punditry class. Same as they did with "Boris preparing to No Deal" at about this same time last year. We all remember that. A Not Happening Event went odds on fav would you believe. A 'licence to print' for the few astuties.
The only reason it'd be unlikely is if the EU cave on all the UK's demands, just as they did this time last year.
Which is quite probable. But the EU only caved last year because the UK was prepared to No Deal and its the same again this time.
Being prepared to go all in can force the other player off.
You say that the EU caved on all the UK's demands at this time last year. You may be right. But if so, why are we back again asking them to cave on the UK's demands now? Surely they've already caved on everything this time last year? Or is this a different cave?
Different cave.
We're revisiting the negotiations of two years ago, not last years one.
The NI Protocol was written before the trade talks and during the 2017-19 Remainer dominated Parliament. Last year's trade talks were completely different.
Even without the Protocol being broken due to the EU's bad faith, it is only logical that following the trade agreement that the Protocol should be revisited anyway now that we have a trade agreement which we
Where do you get the solid science in political betting?
As mentioned upthread, the key is mispriced markets.
George Galloway was quoted at 250/1 for the Bradford by-election, as an example.
And changing information over time. Betting with a timescale of months or even years (as opposed to minutes or hours for sports betting) allows you to play the market as prices change, and end up ‘all green’ no matter what the actual result.
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
I'm in a few of their Telegram groups. They are right about the Covid hoax too apparently.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
If Johnson loses one or both by-elections next month I think he'll definitely face a leadership challenge within 12 months. If he holds both of them he's more likely to get through to 2023. Statement of the obvious probably.
There is no such thing as a leadership challenge now.
Only a no confidence vote if 15% of Tory MPs demand it which he would survive with 51% of the vote from Tory MPs with no further vote allowed for a year. Provided he holds Old Bexley he should survive though even if North Shropshire goes (which could be written off as an anti Paterson protest vote)
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
I'm in a few of their Telegram groups. They are right about the Covid hoax too apparently.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
I'd file that under "be careful of what you wish for". I'd love to know what the 50% of people who think they get paid too much think they ought to be paid. I think part of the reason we get few really high calibre MPs is that there isn't enough reward there. We would end up with poorer candidates and/or those with significant personal funds already. There was a very good reason that salaries for MPs was introduced in the first place.
Unfortunately I think a very large number of people in this country believe that no one should get paid more than they do.
Given 90% of voters earn less than £50,000 let alone £81,932 it is all relative. The 7% who think MPs are paid too little will be within the top 10% earning close to that wage or more, ie looking down on MPs pay as too little, most voters though look up to MPs pay as higher than theirs
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
The simple truth is that we will swing into a trade war
Do you think the EU will get unanimous agreement to start a trade war on its western border when there are the prospects of a real one on its eastern border?
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
I'm in a few of their Telegram groups. They are right about the Covid hoax too apparently.
If you're in a safe & affluent constituency and vote with the Gov't (From the beach potentially during Covid !), what's there to actually do as an MP ?
Not much if you don't fancy it, the casework can all be handled by your office.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
There is no solid science in political betting, it’s long shot or spread betting isn’t it?
Betting on Trump to lose the 2020 election AFTER the votes had been counted was pretty solid science.
Laying Brian Rose for the London Mayoral was also pretty solid science, as was laying Gammons, Laurence Fox, and others.
What's the full list?
Rubio? David Miliband?
What else?
Marco Rubio, the betting saviour of many a Trump Sceptic.
One day somebody will explain that to me. Rubio finished third in Iowa and became the favourite?
I was too busy getting out of that massive Trump red I had to work out why Rubio was the favourite.
I was in the opposite corner, I bet on Cruz and Trump and I spent the next 24 hours desperately covering my red Rubio position DESPITE him coming third.
But I didn't actually mean Iowa, but rather, later on, when he couldn't win.
Perhaps it is a question of extent, but there are a handful of times you do feel the market is being driven by something other than wanting to win the bet.
There is no solid science in political betting, it’s long shot or spread betting isn’t it?
Betting on Trump to lose the 2020 election AFTER the votes had been counted was pretty solid science.
Also, betting after an exit poll has been released. These days, they're almost never wrong, except by a tiny number of seats each way. But at the last few elections a lot of punters have refused to believe them for a number of hours leading to huge betting opportunities.
If you're in a safe & affluent constituency and vote with the Gov't (From the beach potentially during Covid !), what's there to actually do as an MP ?
Not much if you don't fancy it, the casework can all be handled by your office.
Well I knew one MP, before they became very high profile front bencher, saying they lived in a very affluent part of the world, and during their first term, all there was for them to do in the constituency was to do events with local candidates/councillors/businesses.
There was literally sod all for them to do, they even did a lot of the casework themselves.
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
I very much agree that if you know your kung-fo then political betting is very profitable (unlike sport where events are affected by random stuff ) because if you can make sense of all the variables the result can be calculated with great certainty. That said you have to be very good (the tips on PB especially on niche sttuf like seats are excellent)
I dont agree though you are betting against punters more so than sport (except on betfair of course) its just that bookies are not experts either on politics and make mistakes - the recent by elections being a case in point
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Thanks for the further Italy/Austria/Germany road trip advice @IanB2@MattW@malcolmg - much appreciated!
The only tough bit is the long day at each end when you have to pay €40 for the pleasure of driving for hours looking at precisely nothing in northern France (or save the toll and fight with the lorries going through Belgium).
But I do have a very nice secret stopover in France, if you need one.
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
You misunderstand. Profitable Political Betting is all about niche examples. Political Betting is not about slow and steady minimal edge application. It is about home run hitting. There are not many events to bet on (which is why there are not professionals) almost every single time there is some stupid angle which you can hit and clean out.
2015 - Absolute sustained disbelief that the SNP would do well 2015/16 Republican nomination - denial that Trump was favourite including Marco Rubio becoming odds on favourite after finishing third in Iowa 2016 - Brexit, in play betting on result night and pundits kept saying the Remain was still in it despite the overwhelming results evidence to the contrary. 2016 - Election night in-play betting as Florida came in 2017 - Sustained disbelief that the Scottish Tories would do well in Scotland despite the sustained polls in their favour. 2017 - Sustained disbelief that Labour were going to do 'well' despite the rapidly closing polls etc, etc
Political Betting is about identifying the absolutely screaming obvious and then having the courage to bet against the crowd and take the money.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
There is no solid science in political betting, it’s long shot or spread betting isn’t it?
Betting on Trump to lose the 2020 election AFTER the votes had been counted was pretty solid science.
Laying Brian Rose for the London Mayoral was also pretty solid science, as was laying Gammons, Laurence Fox, and others.
What's the full list?
Rubio? David Miliband?
What else?
Marco Rubio, the betting saviour of many a Trump Sceptic.
One day somebody will explain that to me. Rubio finished third in Iowa and became the favourite?
I was too busy getting out of that massive Trump red I had to work out why Rubio was the favourite.
I was in the opposite corner, I bet on Cruz and Trump and I spent the next 24 hours desperately covering my red Rubio position DESPITE him coming third.
But I didn't actually mean Iowa, but rather, later on, when he couldn't win.
Perhaps it is a question of extent, but there are a handful of times you do feel the market is being driven by something other than wanting to win the bet.
Oh yes.
The other weird one that year, I made a few hundred quid on Clinton winning the popular vote, days after the election.
I was like, are some people using Betfair as a giant money laundering exercise?
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Err, wasn’t #FBPE Twitter insisting that the movement of company headquarters was only ever going to be in the other direction?
I have never seen the movement of eight employees be hyped up like this.
It’s the main front page story of the FT. Not known for hyperbole. Clearly some think it is important
It is, but not for the reasons people think. A lot of this will be because tax arbitrage is coming to an end. Countries like the UK will benefit, countries like the Netherlands and Ireland won't. In fact they will lose billions.
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
I very much agree that if you know your kung-fo then political betting is very profitable (unlike sport where events are affected by random stuff ) because if you can make sense of all the variables the result can be calculated with great certainty. That said you have to be very good (the tips on PB especially on niche sttuf like seats are excellent)
I dont agree though you are betting against punters more so than sport (except on betfair of course) its just that bookies are not experts either on politics and make mistakes - the recent by elections being a case in point
Political markets are so thin (compared to mainstream sport betting) that a single punter with a modest amount of cash can shift a bookie's political markets significantly.
There is no solid science in political betting, it’s long shot or spread betting isn’t it?
Betting on Trump to lose the 2020 election AFTER the votes had been counted was pretty solid science.
Laying Brian Rose for the London Mayoral was also pretty solid science, as was laying Gammons, Laurence Fox, and others.
What's the full list?
Rubio? David Miliband?
What else?
Marco Rubio, the betting saviour of many a Trump Sceptic.
One day somebody will explain that to me. Rubio finished third in Iowa and became the favourite?
I was too busy getting out of that massive Trump red I had to work out why Rubio was the favourite.
I was in the opposite corner, I bet on Cruz and Trump and I spent the next 24 hours desperately covering my red Rubio position DESPITE him coming third.
But I didn't actually mean Iowa, but rather, later on, when he couldn't win.
Perhaps it is a question of extent, but there are a handful of times you do feel the market is being driven by something other than wanting to win the bet.
Oh yes.
The other weird one that year, I made a few hundred quid on Clinton winning the popular vote, days after the election.
I was like, are some people using Betfair as a giant money laundering exercise?
Um yes - anything to allows people to put money in from account A and remove from account B is going to be used for such purposes.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Err, wasn’t #FBPE Twitter insisting that the movement of company headquarters was only ever going to be in the other direction?
I have never seen the movement of eight employees be hyped up like this.
You haven't? JP Morgan moved about 15 roles out of London and it got a lot of play.
Edit - Unilever was another one, it got loads of airtime when it was heading to the Netherlands and suddenly it wasn't so it stopped making the news.
Naughty. It was nearly 10x that.
Not a huge dent in the global JP workforce, that said.
Iirc they announced 1,000 people, then cut that in half when the people said "fuck no". My understanding is that the number who have actually gone is in the low tens, closer to single figures than three figures.
I understand what you are saying, mispricing exists in horse racing too, where it’s been kept back, hidden away in point to points despite how fast it was when it last raced on course
What are you talking about?
The more knowledge you have the better you can make an evaluation. I’m following horses I know are fast off the course, I suspect will be much too long in the betting.
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
You misunderstand. Profitable Political Betting is all about niche examples. Political Betting is not about slow and steady minimal edge application. It is about home run hitting. There are not many events to bet on (which is why there are not professionals) almost every single time there is some stupid angle which you can hit and clean out.
2015 - Absolute sustained disbelief that the SNP would do well 2015/16 Republican nomination - denial that Trump was favourite including Marco Rubio becoming odds on favourite after finishing third in Iowa 2016 - Brexit, in play betting on result night and pundits kept saying the Remain was still in it despite the overwhelming results evidence to the contrary. 2016 - Election night in-play betting as Florida came in 2017 - Sustained disbelief that the Scottish Tories would do well in Scotland despite the sustained polls in their favour. 2017 - Sustained disbelief that Labour were going to do 'well' despite the rapidly closing polls etc, etc
Political Betting is about identifying the absolutely screaming obvious and then having the courage to bet against the crowd and take the money.
It is also about realising that "the market" doesn't know any more than anyone else. It certainly doesn't know more than, say, PB. We should also trust ourselves I mean we talk about it every effing day so damn well should know more about it than random punters.
As for our new arrival @MoonRabbit, I am just shocked that coming to PB for the first time he/she didn't immediately find evidence of politics or betting. Shocked, I tell you.
Also waiting for an explanation of the hurdlers "hidden away at point to points" thing that they identified.
There is no solid science in political betting, it’s long shot or spread betting isn’t it?
Betting on Trump to lose the 2020 election AFTER the votes had been counted was pretty solid science.
Laying Brian Rose for the London Mayoral was also pretty solid science, as was laying Gammons, Laurence Fox, and others.
What's the full list?
Rubio? David Miliband?
What else?
Marco Rubio, the betting saviour of many a Trump Sceptic.
One day somebody will explain that to me. Rubio finished third in Iowa and became the favourite?
I was too busy getting out of that massive Trump red I had to work out why Rubio was the favourite.
I was in the opposite corner, I bet on Cruz and Trump and I spent the next 24 hours desperately covering my red Rubio position DESPITE him coming third.
But I didn't actually mean Iowa, but rather, later on, when he couldn't win.
Perhaps it is a question of extent, but there are a handful of times you do feel the market is being driven by something other than wanting to win the bet.
Oh yes.
The other weird one that year, I made a few hundred quid on Clinton winning the popular vote, days after the election.
I was like, are some people using Betfair as a giant money laundering exercise?
Um yes - anything to allows people to put money in from account A and remove from account B is going to be used for such purposes.
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
I very much agree that if you know your kung-fo then political betting is very profitable (unlike sport where events are affected by random stuff ) because if you can make sense of all the variables the result can be calculated with great certainty. That said you have to be very good (the tips on PB especially on niche sttuf like seats are excellent)
I dont agree though you are betting against punters more so than sport (except on betfair of course) its just that bookies are not experts either on politics and make mistakes - the recent by elections being a case in point
Political markets are so thin (compared to mainstream sport betting) that a single punter with a modest amount of cash can shift a bookie's political markets significantly.
I understand what you are saying, mispricing exists in horse racing too, where it’s been kept back, hidden away in point to points despite how fast it was when it last raced on course
What are you talking about?
The more knowledge you have the better you can make an evaluation. I’m following horses I know are fast off the course, I suspect will be much too long in the betting.
If you paid MPs a lot more, and crucially the whips were weakened in theory you should get plenty more parliaments like the 2017-2019 where the Gov't struggles to get anything through- but debates are................. thoughtful & genuine
There's almost literally no point with the present whip system, when one party has a solid majority; and a Commons arrangement such as 2017-19 will probably behave in aggregate like it did again without the money.
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
You misunderstand. Profitable Political Betting is all about niche examples. Political Betting is not about slow and steady minimal edge application. It is about home run hitting. There are not many events to bet on (which is why there are not professionals) almost every single time there is some stupid angle which you can hit and clean out.
2015 - Absolute sustained disbelief that the SNP would do well 2015/16 Republican nomination - denial that Trump was favourite including Marco Rubio becoming odds on favourite after finishing third in Iowa 2016 - Brexit, in play betting on result night and pundits kept saying the Remain was still in it despite the overwhelming results evidence to the contrary. 2016 - Election night in-play betting as Florida came in 2017 - Sustained disbelief that the Scottish Tories would do well in Scotland despite the sustained polls in their favour. 2017 - Sustained disbelief that Labour were going to do 'well' despite the rapidly closing polls etc, etc
Political Betting is about identifying the absolutely screaming obvious and then having the courage to bet against the crowd and take the money.
yes very much so - niche is king - take the London Major elections ,Lord Buckethead was 16/1 at one point (still 7/1 at election time) to get 20000 votes . A glimpse at social media would tell you two weeks out he was very popular
There is no solid science in political betting, it’s long shot or spread betting isn’t it?
Betting on Trump to lose the 2020 election AFTER the votes had been counted was pretty solid science.
Laying Brian Rose for the London Mayoral was also pretty solid science, as was laying Gammons, Laurence Fox, and others.
What's the full list?
Rubio? David Miliband?
What else?
Marco Rubio, the betting saviour of many a Trump Sceptic.
One day somebody will explain that to me. Rubio finished third in Iowa and became the favourite?
I was too busy getting out of that massive Trump red I had to work out why Rubio was the favourite.
That was a very wierd market from start to finish, as is slowly dawned on everyone that DJT was going to be the nominee.
What really surprised me was 538.
They put up a perfectly good predictor of the result in each coming state, and how that state allocated delegates, but EVEN THEN substantially underestimated DJT's chance.
I could understand an average UK punter not realising that Florida's "winner takes all" rule was going to make the exact percent in NC moot, but I thought better of 538.
I think @HYUFD's point is well made. The 7% of people who think MPs are paid too little are almost certainly the 7% top earners in the country (which takes us down to I've no idea what figure of income).
For the vast majority otherwise, 80 grand is a lot of money.
” McLaren Group is aware of a news media report stating it has been sold to Audi. This is wholly inaccurate and McLaren is seeking to have the story removed.
“McLaren’s technology strategy has always involved ongoing discussions and collaboration with relevant partners and suppliers, including other carmakers, however, there has been no change in the ownership structure of the McLaren Group.
I think @HYUFD's point is well made. The 7% of people who think MPs are paid too little are almost certainly the 7% top earners in the country (which takes us down to I've no idea what figure of income).
For the vast majority otherwise, 80 grand is a lot of money.
coupled with perhaps the best pension benefits in the UK
There is no solid science in political betting, it’s long shot or spread betting isn’t it?
Betting on Trump to lose the 2020 election AFTER the votes had been counted was pretty solid science.
Also, betting after an exit poll has been released. These days, they're almost never wrong, except by a tiny number of seats each way. But at the last few elections a lot of punters have refused to believe them for a number of hours leading to huge betting opportunities.
Ha, that reminds of Betfair Sportsbook 2019 SNP Seats under/over market after the Exit Poll was released. The Exit poll isn't calibrated well for Scotland and massively overstates them (it's claimed the SNP would take Orkney & Shetland in both 2015 and 2019) and Betfair set to seat line for every party to match the exit poll.
I am extremely limited by them so I was begging people on here to hoover up the free money of the under.
I think @HYUFD's point is well made. The 7% of people who think MPs are paid too little are almost certainly the 7% top earners in the country (which takes us down to I've no idea what figure of income).
For the vast majority otherwise, 80 grand is a lot of money.
The geographical map of the 7% would be interesting*
” McLaren Group is aware of a news media report stating it has been sold to Audi. This is wholly inaccurate and McLaren is seeking to have the story removed.
“McLaren’s technology strategy has always involved ongoing discussions and collaboration with relevant partners and suppliers, including other carmakers, however, there has been no change in the ownership structure of the McLaren Group.
If you're in a safe & affluent constituency and vote with the Gov't (From the beach potentially during Covid !), what's there to actually do as an MP ?
Not much if you don't fancy it, the casework can all be handled by your office.
Well I knew one MP, before they became very high profile front bencher, saying they lived in a very affluent part of the world, and during their first term, all there was for them to do in the constituency was to do events with local candidates/councillors/businesses.
There was literally sod all for them to do, they even did a lot of the casework themselves.
Email has dramatically increased the casework MPs receive, however
” McLaren Group is aware of a news media report stating it has been sold to Audi. This is wholly inaccurate and McLaren is seeking to have the story removed.
“McLaren’s technology strategy has always involved ongoing discussions and collaboration with relevant partners and suppliers, including other carmakers, however, there has been no change in the ownership structure of the McLaren Group.
Merger then!
(Many years ago I was working on a merger on behalf on a client, Saturday afternoon some of the trade papers and sundays picked up on it, saying company x is about to buy company z, so I helped draft a response saying, company x has no plans on buying company y, which was true as a merger isn't an acquisition.)
There is no solid science in political betting, it’s long shot or spread betting isn’t it?
Betting on Trump to lose the 2020 election AFTER the votes had been counted was pretty solid science.
Laying Brian Rose for the London Mayoral was also pretty solid science, as was laying Gammons, Laurence Fox, and others.
What's the full list?
Rubio? David Miliband?
What else?
Marco Rubio, the betting saviour of many a Trump Sceptic.
One day somebody will explain that to me. Rubio finished third in Iowa and became the favourite?
I was too busy getting out of that massive Trump red I had to work out why Rubio was the favourite.
That was a very wierd market from start to finish, as it slowly dawned on everyone that DJT was actually going to be the nominee.
I think Nate Silver's piece back in Autumn 2015 which can be paraphrased as "Sure Trump is miles a head in the polling and I have made my entire reputation on trusting the polling but Trump has zero chance of getting the nomination" had a big effect.
The Rubio and Jeb Bush prices after voting had started though were completely inexplicable.
” McLaren Group is aware of a news media report stating it has been sold to Audi. This is wholly inaccurate and McLaren is seeking to have the story removed.
“McLaren’s technology strategy has always involved ongoing discussions and collaboration with relevant partners and suppliers, including other carmakers, however, there has been no change in the ownership structure of the McLaren Group.
Interesting, maybe the owners are trying to bid up the price or looking for another investor rather than a buyer.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Err, wasn’t #FBPE Twitter insisting that the movement of company headquarters was only ever going to be in the other direction?
I have never seen the movement of eight employees be hyped up like this.
It’s the main front page story of the FT. Not known for hyperbole. Clearly some think it is important
It is, but not for the reasons people think. A lot of this will be because tax arbitrage is coming to an end. Countries like the UK will benefit, countries like the Netherlands and Ireland won't. In fact they will lose billions.
AFAICS it is a reaction to Shell losing its court case in the Netherlands about reducing its emissions?
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Err, wasn’t #FBPE Twitter insisting that the movement of company headquarters was only ever going to be in the other direction?
I have never seen the movement of eight employees be hyped up like this.
It’s the main front page story of the FT. Not known for hyperbole. Clearly some think it is important
It is, but not for the reasons people think. A lot of this will be because tax arbitrage is coming to an end. Countries like the UK will benefit, countries like the Netherlands and Ireland won't. In fact they will lose billions.
Yes, goodbye to the Double Irish Dutch Sandwich. Have a full English breakfast, instead
If you can’t headquarter somewhere financially beneficial, then you might as well headquarter in a world city where your senior staff can REALLY enjoy their money. That’s not Dublin or Amsterdam, charming as they are
Speaking of which, London offices are roaring back to life
“Offices are in demand again as central London recovers”
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
You misunderstand. Profitable Political Betting is all about niche examples. Political Betting is not about slow and steady minimal edge application. It is about home run hitting. There are not many events to bet on (which is why there are not professionals) almost every single time there is some stupid angle which you can hit and clean out.
2015 - Absolute sustained disbelief that the SNP would do well 2015/16 Republican nomination - denial that Trump was favourite including Marco Rubio becoming odds on favourite after finishing third in Iowa 2016 - Brexit, in play betting on result night and pundits kept saying the Remain was still in it despite the overwhelming results evidence to the contrary. 2016 - Election night in-play betting as Florida came in 2017 - Sustained disbelief that the Scottish Tories would do well in Scotland despite the sustained polls in their favour. 2017 - Sustained disbelief that Labour were going to do 'well' despite the rapidly closing polls etc, etc
Political Betting is about identifying the absolutely screaming obvious and then having the courage to bet against the crowd and take the money.
My best lays have been -
There was never going to be a 2nd EU referendum. There was never going to be a No Deal WTO Brexit. Jeremy Corbyn was never going to be PM. Trump was not getting a 2nd term.
And my best back was Johnson to win GE19 by landslide.
By "best" bets I mean those with the highest 'profits to worry' ratio.
Interestingly, my politics betting & predicting has been far better since I joined PB than it was before. Eg I got GE17 all wrong. Also GE15.
So, I think I am in some way absorbing from here in the right way, it's the right grist for the right mill, incorporating the wheat and rejecting the chaff, as it were.
Where do you get the solid science in political betting?
As mentioned upthread, the key is mispriced markets.
George Galloway was quoted at 250/1 for the Bradford by-election, as an example.
And changing information over time. Betting with a timescale of months or even years (as opposed to minutes or hours for sports betting) allows you to play the market as prices change, and end up ‘all green’ no matter what the actual result.
I understand a lot better now thank you. It’s like celebDAQ you are saying?
I might place a political bet. Is there such thing as a double in political betting? The Libdems to win Salop North comfortably and The Conservatives to win it back at the main election is what normally happens isn’t it.
” McLaren Group is aware of a news media report stating it has been sold to Audi. This is wholly inaccurate and McLaren is seeking to have the story removed.
“McLaren’s technology strategy has always involved ongoing discussions and collaboration with relevant partners and suppliers, including other carmakers, however, there has been no change in the ownership structure of the McLaren Group.
Interesting, maybe the owners are trying to bid up the price or looking for another investor rather than a buyer.
I just couldn't understand why McLaren would sell out to VAG like that. Made no sense.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Err, wasn’t #FBPE Twitter insisting that the movement of company headquarters was only ever going to be in the other direction?
I have never seen the movement of eight employees be hyped up like this.
It’s the main front page story of the FT. Not known for hyperbole. Clearly some think it is important
It is, but not for the reasons people think. A lot of this will be because tax arbitrage is coming to an end. Countries like the UK will benefit, countries like the Netherlands and Ireland won't. In fact they will lose billions.
AFAICS it is a reaction to Shell losing its court case in the Netherlands about reducing its emissions?
Yes, that's Shell, but more generally we're going to see a lot of these moves out of Ireland, Netherlands and Luxembourg into the UK and Germany where these companies have got their actual operational HQ.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Err, wasn’t #FBPE Twitter insisting that the movement of company headquarters was only ever going to be in the other direction?
I have never seen the movement of eight employees be hyped up like this.
It’s the main front page story of the FT. Not known for hyperbole. Clearly some think it is important
It is, but not for the reasons people think. A lot of this will be because tax arbitrage is coming to an end. Countries like the UK will benefit, countries like the Netherlands and Ireland won't. In fact they will lose billions.
AFAICS it is a reaction to Shell losing its court case in the Netherlands about reducing its emissions?
Yes, that's Shell, but more generally we're going to see a lot of these moves out of Ireland, Netherlands and Luxembourg into the UK and Germany where these companies have got their actual operational HQ.
The other attraction is our legal and judicial sectors.
Is one thing I worry about with this government's constant attacks on the judiciary.
This is why companies like HQing in the UK, we have a robust judiciary willing to say no to the government.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
” McLaren Group is aware of a news media report stating it has been sold to Audi. This is wholly inaccurate and McLaren is seeking to have the story removed.
“McLaren’s technology strategy has always involved ongoing discussions and collaboration with relevant partners and suppliers, including other carmakers, however, there has been no change in the ownership structure of the McLaren Group.
Interesting, maybe the owners are trying to bid up the price or looking for another investor rather than a buyer.
I just couldn't understand why McLaren would sell out to VAG like that. Made no sense.
Buying Mclaren is suspected to be the cheapest current way of getting into F1 given the joining fee now required to enter a team.
Now you could in theory buy Sauber but as you need to move it to the UK, you are probably little better off doing that then starting afresh.
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
But was that after they couldn't get to the cathedral? That's what was reported in the Mail. Although, that might make the driver a tad suspicious, so maybe the Mail have got it wrong.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Err, wasn’t #FBPE Twitter insisting that the movement of company headquarters was only ever going to be in the other direction?
I have never seen the movement of eight employees be hyped up like this.
You haven't? JP Morgan moved about 15 roles out of London and it got a lot of play.
Edit - Unilever was another one, it got loads of airtime when it was heading to the Netherlands and suddenly it wasn't so it stopped making the news.
Naughty. It was nearly 10x that.
Not a huge dent in the global JP workforce, that said.
Iirc they announced 1,000 people, then cut that in half when the people said "fuck no". My understanding is that the number who have actually gone is in the low tens, closer to single figures than three figures.
Isn't this perhaps more to do with the Dutch Court which took it upon itself to lay down the law WORLDWIDE about how quickly RDS must reduce its emissions?
” McLaren Group is aware of a news media report stating it has been sold to Audi. This is wholly inaccurate and McLaren is seeking to have the story removed.
“McLaren’s technology strategy has always involved ongoing discussions and collaboration with relevant partners and suppliers, including other carmakers, however, there has been no change in the ownership structure of the McLaren Group.
Interesting, maybe the owners are trying to bid up the price or looking for another investor rather than a buyer.
The story seems to be that there is an Audi / BMW "bidding war", except BMW aren't that interested.
If you're in a safe & affluent constituency and vote with the Gov't (From the beach potentially during Covid !), what's there to actually do as an MP ?
Not much if you don't fancy it, the casework can all be handled by your office.
Well I knew one MP, before they became very high profile front bencher, saying they lived in a very affluent part of the world, and during their first term, all there was for them to do in the constituency was to do events with local candidates/councillors/businesses.
There was literally sod all for them to do, they even did a lot of the casework themselves.
Email has dramatically increased the casework MPs receive, however
I wrote to my MP (Cox) on the day Iceland Bank folded demanding he ask the government to freeze Iceland's assets in this country, what with me having imprudently large sums with the bank, and never got a reply. OTOH the government did exactly that a couple of days later, so perhaps he did have a word.
” McLaren Group is aware of a news media report stating it has been sold to Audi. This is wholly inaccurate and McLaren is seeking to have the story removed.
“McLaren’s technology strategy has always involved ongoing discussions and collaboration with relevant partners and suppliers, including other carmakers, however, there has been no change in the ownership structure of the McLaren Group.
Interesting, maybe the owners are trying to bid up the price or looking for another investor rather than a buyer.
Well, presumably there’s talks of some sort going on between the two companies, Autosport is a respected publication and would be expected to double-source stories of such magnitude.
So, it’s not an acquisition today. It might be one tomorrow, or might be working towards some sort of partnership or investment rather than a takeover.
Breaking - Dutch government 'unpleasantly surprised' and 'deeply regrets' announcement by Shell of plans to move tax residence and CEO to UK and drop the 'Royal Dutch' from the name - @AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
Err, wasn’t #FBPE Twitter insisting that the movement of company headquarters was only ever going to be in the other direction?
I have never seen the movement of eight employees be hyped up like this.
You haven't? JP Morgan moved about 15 roles out of London and it got a lot of play.
Edit - Unilever was another one, it got loads of airtime when it was heading to the Netherlands and suddenly it wasn't so it stopped making the news.
Cost its Eu-phile CEO his job too:
Unilever’s chief executive, Paul Polman, is stepping down just months after a shareholder rebellion forced the company to scrap a planned move from London to Rotterdam.
The group, whose brands include Marmite, Dove soap and Magnum ice-cream, ditched its plan to simplify its dual Anglo-Dutch structure in October after an unprecedented protest from UK shareholders, many of whom would have been forced to sell up if the move had gone ahead.
The row was a significant blow to the credibility of its top executives, Polman and the chair, Marijn Dekkers.
What you find on this site are tips from people who are not realising they are giving them .In the sense that many on here know a lot about niche politics (or the seat where they live etc) but not much about betting. If you know about betting you can use information on here to your advantage
” McLaren Group is aware of a news media report stating it has been sold to Audi. This is wholly inaccurate and McLaren is seeking to have the story removed.
“McLaren’s technology strategy has always involved ongoing discussions and collaboration with relevant partners and suppliers, including other carmakers, however, there has been no change in the ownership structure of the McLaren Group.
Interesting, maybe the owners are trying to bid up the price or looking for another investor rather than a buyer.
I just couldn't understand why McLaren would sell out to VAG like that. Made no sense.
Buying Mclaren is suspected to be the cheapest current way of getting into F1 given the joining fee now required to enter a team.
Now you could in theory buy Sauber but as you need to move it to the UK, you are probably little better off doing that then starting afresh.
Andretti Group were rumoured to be sniffing around Sauber a few weeks back, but came to nothing. The shareholders do look prepared to sell though. Williams will also be for sale at some point, the VC group that bought out the Williams family would happily take a decent return for a couple of years’ work.
However they dress it up, many of the Tory opponents are really motivated by opposing the Home Counties sections - which are going ahead?
The northern Tories are motivated by connecting up the north with the fast link to the south - which isn’t going ahead?
The short section in the north that will actually be built doesnt seem to have much benefit?
The real argument behind the project wasn’t getting to Birmingham earlier, but relieving capacity limitations along the London-Birmingham route; it isn’t clear whether the bits left after the announcement will still do this?
I think @HYUFD's point is well made. The 7% of people who think MPs are paid too little are almost certainly the 7% top earners in the country (which takes us down to I've no idea what figure of income).
For the vast majority otherwise, 80 grand is a lot of money.
The geographical map of the 7% would be interesting*
*Obvious.
Indeed, the vast majority in largerly safe Labour London and the largely safe Tory Home Counties I would imagine.
Barely any in the key swing seats of the RedWall so neither main party will push the issue of higher pay for MPs
Political Betting. I never considered it before because I didn’t think how it would work. It makes more sense to me now thinking election is a race - can you in political betting work out who will win and back the winner? I have never bet on politics. I do know about politics. When I was at uni I was told I understand political issues better than anyone. But I have only bet on horses. I backed two winners when I was at Cheltenham over the weekend. I bet on hurdles mostly, because I know now if I back the fastest horse I will win. steeplechase is too much of luck.
What I meant is the main factor I am looking for in hurdles is speed round the course, there are other things to consider, which I do look at, but I don’t think any of it even form is going to matter as speed on the course distance and conditions. I’m often backing winners with my way of choosing I don’t really care very much about odds, I don’t look for better odds when confident who winner is. Is there a similar way of doing this in political betting? I don’t think so.
There is much more mispricing in politics than horses/footie and this is a good place to identify it. Most recently, lots of people made a packet in Chesham and Amersham at 20/1, tipped by the site owner.
I identified it as a good value loser, and cashed out a £5 bet for £6.20. Genius decision.
£1.20? Seriously? If I tell you which horse is going to win a hurdles race I would expect more than a five pound bet on it!
I understand what you are saying, mispricing exists in horse racing too, where it’s been kept back, hidden away in point to points despite how fast it was when it last raced on course.
Correct me where I am wrong, you are saying there is money to be made betting against the market, where the market lacks knowledge?
on other hand this may not be completely right, yes if I am sure betting markets are wrong, it means I can bet against them. But not all bets against a market are smart ones, smartest bets are those where you work out who the winner is.When you know what is going to happen and why. And to do that you need to know something.
Is a media narrative founded in something that really matters? Is the media actually objective? If these answers no, it means not only you shouldn’t learn from media but they help you get political betting wrong.
Are opinion polls a measure of public opinion? Not necessarily. For starters it depends if they were scrupulously done to accurate measure of public opinion. And if set up fair are they answered honestly? Not if someone says they don’t know who to vote for despite knowing they will vote and for exactly who. Very honest with you, I done that myself? Sometimes I’m feeling okay to give an opinion sometimes I’m not.
to do good political bets you need to know something, but you can’t trust media or polls to give you that knowledge.
If you're in a safe & affluent constituency and vote with the Gov't (From the beach potentially during Covid !), what's there to actually do as an MP ?
Not much if you don't fancy it, the casework can all be handled by your office.
Well I knew one MP, before they became very high profile front bencher, saying they lived in a very affluent part of the world, and during their first term, all there was for them to do in the constituency was to do events with local candidates/councillors/businesses.
There was literally sod all for them to do, they even did a lot of the casework themselves.
Email has dramatically increased the casework MPs receive, however
I wrote to my MP (Cox) on the day Iceland Bank folded demanding he ask the government to freeze Iceland's assets in this country, what with me having imprudently large sums with the bank, and never got a reply. OTOH the government did exactly that a couple of days later, so perhaps he did have a word.
6% I think I was getting. Those were the days.
The other advantage of email being that MPs can do their casework from anywhere, even islands in the Caribbean?
The man's motivation was "yet to be understood", he said (Head of Counter Terrorism Policing North West Russ Jackson)
Surely a “terror incident” assumes a terrorising intent? It’s clear as mud.
But which flavour of terrorising intent ?
Militant islamism, anti-abortion, anti-vaccination, far right ?
The Mail article suggests that he wanted to go to the Anglican Cathedral where a Remembrance service was being held.
R4 WATO says he asked to be taken to the Women's Hospital
It seems he wanted to get to the remembrance but was held up by road closures and traffic, and the turn into the hospital was an impulse decision? The sequence of events fits someone who knew the device was already primed to go off at 11 am and was running out of time.
Hmm. Not sure about that. Not sure we have seen timing devices on suicide vests.
I’m not against political betting just trying to work out what makes it sensible. After I found this chat room, which is confusing at first because it’s not obviously politics or betting going on in the chat, I looked how to do political betting and it seems it’s betting a hunch on trends that means you spread your political bets with your hunch. The obvious problem I see is where to get objective knowledge from, because media like to give impressions about something that probably won’t matter to votes, and is not factual just rigged up. So do you trust media narrative for a hunch?
The key to understanding Political Betting is that possibly even more than any other form of betting you are betting against other punters and not the bookies.
And other punters are rank rotten at political betting. Because it's not a professional's domain, it is mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
For instance people staked hundreds of millions upon millions of pounds on Donald Trump to win the presidency AFTER the 2020 election. They were still betting on him to win through the Trump Exit Date market into January this year.
During the Scottish Parliament elections John Curtis made a mental slip and said, with only a few seats left to declare, that the SNP were going to win 63 seats when 64 seats were nailed on due to the breakdown of the regional vote. A hugely profitable bet on the seat bands market then ensued.
The 2015 Scottish Constituency betting market profits and Brexit vote are legendary on here.
There is so much inefficiency it is unreal.
Yes I totally agree with that point. It’s not a professionals domain, it’s mostly amateurs backing what they want to happen.
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
You misunderstand. Profitable Political Betting is all about niche examples. Political Betting is not about slow and steady minimal edge application. It is about home run hitting. There are not many events to bet on (which is why there are not professionals) almost every single time there is some stupid angle which you can hit and clean out.
2015 - Absolute sustained disbelief that the SNP would do well 2015/16 Republican nomination - denial that Trump was favourite including Marco Rubio becoming odds on favourite after finishing third in Iowa 2016 - Brexit, in play betting on result night and pundits kept saying the Remain was still in it despite the overwhelming results evidence to the contrary. 2016 - Election night in-play betting as Florida came in 2017 - Sustained disbelief that the Scottish Tories would do well in Scotland despite the sustained polls in their favour. 2017 - Sustained disbelief that Labour were going to do 'well' despite the rapidly closing polls etc, etc
Political Betting is about identifying the absolutely screaming obvious and then having the courage to bet against the crowd and take the money.
yes very much so - niche is king - take the London Major elections ,Lord Buckethead was 16/1 at one point (still 7/1 at election time) to get 20000 votes . A glimpse at social media would tell you two weeks out he was very popular
Comments
Like "Labour to have a lead in the polls this calendar year" for example...
The many tentacles of Volkswagen AG:
Where do you get the solid science in political betting?
One thing I would look for is signs of strong opinions like record popularity figures. If you realise opinions are particularly strong you could be confident there won’t be last minute swing against your bet based on the strong opinions. Does that make sense, the difference between “I might vote something else this time” and “I’m definitely not voting for them again, they are rubbish.” You can from some responses be more confident what people will actually do. But it’s not the measure getting headlines is it, that is poll lead with lots of I might vote something else next time built in.
There is no solid science in political betting, it’s long shot or spread betting isn’t it?
A former associate of the sexual predator Jeffrey Epstein has insisted that he saw Prince Andrew "remove" Virginia Giuffre's "bathing suit top and then start grinding against her" on Epstein's Caribbean island
https://twitter.com/thetimes/status/1460167962816614403
@AFP. This is a big deal here in the Netherlands
https://twitter.com/dannyctkemp/status/1460177125021990914
George Galloway was quoted at 250/1 for the Bradford by-election, as an example.
And just last week, in an admittedly thin market, it was possible to back covid restrictions even after the bookie had all but shouted from the rooftops that they would settle "yes" as the winner.
We're revisiting the negotiations of two years ago, not last years one.
The NI Protocol was written before the trade talks and during the 2017-19 Remainer dominated Parliament. Last year's trade talks were completely different.
Even without the Protocol being broken due to the EU's bad faith, it is only logical that following the trade agreement that the Protocol should be revisited anyway now that we have a trade agreement which we
I'm in a few of their Telegram groups. They are right about the Covid hoax too apparently.
Rubio? David Miliband?
What else?
But you are talking about some rather niche examples of mistakes made. Without that, what do you actually have yourself to go on?
Only a no confidence vote if 15% of Tory MPs demand it which he would survive with 51% of the vote from Tory MPs with no further vote allowed for a year. Provided he holds Old Bexley he should survive though even if North Shropshire goes (which could be written off as an anti Paterson protest vote)
The Santorum surge was great in 2012.
Elizabeth Warren for the Dem nomination in 2020.
There have been plenty of others.
Oh yes, during the Cleggasm, that was one of my profitable lays and sells, at one point I think I sold the Lib Dem seats at 96 (!).
I was too busy getting out of that massive Trump red I had to work out why Rubio was the favourite.
Such a pity these people didn't bet on their predictions.
Not much if you don't fancy it, the casework can all be handled by your office.
Edit - Unilever was another one, it got loads of airtime when it was heading to the Netherlands and suddenly it wasn't so it stopped making the news.
But I didn't actually mean Iowa, but rather, later on, when he couldn't win.
Perhaps it is a question of extent, but there are a handful of times you do feel the market is being driven by something other than wanting to win the bet.
There was literally sod all for them to do, they even did a lot of the casework themselves.
I dont agree though you are betting against punters more so than sport (except on betfair of course) its just that bookies are not experts either on politics and make mistakes - the recent by elections being a case in point
But I do have a very nice secret stopover in France, if you need one.
2015 - Absolute sustained disbelief that the SNP would do well
2015/16 Republican nomination - denial that Trump was favourite including Marco Rubio becoming odds on favourite after finishing third in Iowa
2016 - Brexit, in play betting on result night and pundits kept saying the Remain was still in it despite the overwhelming results evidence to the contrary.
2016 - Election night in-play betting as Florida came in
2017 - Sustained disbelief that the Scottish Tories would do well in Scotland despite the sustained polls in their favour.
2017 - Sustained disbelief that Labour were going to do 'well' despite the rapidly closing polls
etc, etc
Political Betting is about identifying the absolutely screaming obvious and then having the courage to bet against the crowd and take the money.
Not a huge dent in the global JP workforce, that said.
The other weird one that year, I made a few hundred quid on Clinton winning the popular vote, days after the election.
I was like, are some people using Betfair as a giant money laundering exercise?
As for our new arrival @MoonRabbit, I am just shocked that coming to PB for the first time he/she didn't immediately find evidence of politics or betting. Shocked, I tell you.
Also waiting for an explanation of the hurdlers "hidden away at point to points" thing that they identified.
There's almost literally no point with the present whip system, when one party has a solid majority; and a Commons arrangement such as 2017-19 will probably behave in aggregate like it did again without the money.
Again, what's the point ?
They put up a perfectly good predictor of the result in each coming state, and how that state allocated delegates, but EVEN THEN substantially underestimated DJT's chance.
I could understand an average UK punter not realising that Florida's "winner takes all" rule was going to make the exact percent in NC moot, but I thought better of 538.
For the vast majority otherwise, 80 grand is a lot of money.
https://www.mclaren.com/racing/inside-the-mtc/mclaren-group-statement-sale/
” McLaren Group is aware of a news media report stating it has been sold to Audi. This is wholly inaccurate and McLaren is seeking to have the story removed.
“McLaren’s technology strategy has always involved ongoing discussions and collaboration with relevant partners and suppliers, including other carmakers, however, there has been no change in the ownership structure of the McLaren Group.
I am extremely limited by them so I was begging people on here to hoover up the free money of the under.
*Obvious.
(Many years ago I was working on a merger on behalf on a client, Saturday afternoon some of the trade papers and sundays picked up on it, saying company x is about to buy company z, so I helped draft a response saying, company x has no plans on buying company y, which was true as a merger isn't an acquisition.)
The Rubio and Jeb Bush prices after voting had started though were completely inexplicable.
If you can’t headquarter somewhere financially beneficial, then you might as well headquarter in a world city where your senior staff can REALLY enjoy their money. That’s not Dublin or Amsterdam, charming as they are
Speaking of which, London offices are roaring back to life
“Offices are in demand again as central London recovers”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/35715686-4558-11ec-aa43-5cc5157b09b9?shareToken=ffc02b387b67cbd8969a5a16006c9ab8
There was never going to be a 2nd EU referendum.
There was never going to be a No Deal WTO Brexit.
Jeremy Corbyn was never going to be PM.
Trump was not getting a 2nd term.
And my best back was Johnson to win GE19 by landslide.
By "best" bets I mean those with the highest 'profits to worry' ratio.
Interestingly, my politics betting & predicting has been far better since I joined PB than it was before. Eg I got GE17 all wrong. Also GE15.
So, I think I am in some way absorbing from here in the right way, it's the right grist for the right mill, incorporating the wheat and rejecting the chaff, as it were.
I might place a political bet. Is there such thing as a double in political betting? The Libdems to win Salop North comfortably and The Conservatives to win it back at the main election is what normally happens isn’t it.
Back later. I’ve got to do the washing.
Is one thing I worry about with this government's constant attacks on the judiciary.
This is why companies like HQing in the UK, we have a robust judiciary willing to say no to the government.
Now you could in theory buy Sauber but as you need to move it to the UK, you are probably little better off doing that then starting afresh.
This link is FOE crowing, not a news report:
https://friendsoftheearth.eu/press-release/historic-victory-judge-forces-shell-to-drastically-reduce-co2-emissions/
6% I think I was getting. Those were the days.
So, it’s not an acquisition today. It might be one tomorrow, or might be working towards some sort of partnership or investment rather than a takeover.
Unilever’s chief executive, Paul Polman, is stepping down just months after a shareholder rebellion forced the company to scrap a planned move from London to Rotterdam.
The group, whose brands include Marmite, Dove soap and Magnum ice-cream, ditched its plan to simplify its dual Anglo-Dutch structure in October after an unprecedented protest from UK shareholders, many of whom would have been forced to sell up if the move had gone ahead.
The row was a significant blow to the credibility of its top executives, Polman and the chair, Marijn Dekkers.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/nov/29/unilever-boss-paul-polman-quits-after-botched-move-to-netherlands-rotterdam
What you find on this site are tips from people who are not realising they are giving them .In the sense that many on here know a lot about niche politics (or the seat where they live etc) but not much about betting. If you know about betting you can use information on here to your advantage
However they dress it up, many of the Tory opponents are really motivated by opposing the Home Counties sections - which are going ahead?
The northern Tories are motivated by connecting up the north with the fast link to the south - which isn’t going ahead?
The short section in the north that will actually be built doesnt seem to have much benefit?
The real argument behind the project wasn’t getting to Birmingham earlier, but relieving capacity limitations along the London-Birmingham route; it isn’t clear whether the bits left after the announcement will still do this?
Barely any in the key swing seats of the RedWall so neither main party will push the issue of higher pay for MPs
One of the advantages of a cautious approach in a time of rapidly accumulating evidence
https://twitter.com/sunilbhop/status/1460198791462760451?s=20