Anecdote: one of my friend's cousins is a billionaire. Their deal is to go to any city's residential district and buy a warehouse-sized, er, warehouse and make them huge domestic living spaces. Or several houses then knock them together.
How awful, we thought, to have to remember your toothbrush and favourite shirt whenever you go to one or other of your houses. Before it dawned on us that of course he has as many toothbrushes and favourite shirts as he has houses.
Because billionaire.
Small and obvious point but most people have initial difficulty in comprehending the scale of wealth we are talking about.
I have two close friends who are insanely wealthy
The first is worth £1bn+ the second is £250m
I understand the mindset of these people. But with a caveat:
This is going to sound bonkers but the £1bn guy recently said to me “if I was REALLY rich then yada yada”
He feels that he is well below the absolute top tier. The musks and bezos and Saudi princes. And he struggles to understand how THEY think
It’s all relative
That is absolutely right. (Pun intended.) It's also ample illustration of the fact that EVERY alpha, deep down, is a beta, motivated by the thought that his tinky is considerably shorter than some other guy's.
Sigmas or "sigma wolves" don't give a toss about waving their widdlers, buying football clubs, or any other kind of juvenile competitive behaviour. We know we're superior.
Message to any billionaires (or Basil Zaharoff fans) reading this: just keep on competing with those who are willing to compete with you, you silly sods.
Both my Crazy Rich Friends enjoy life but I’m not sure either of them is “happy”. More like: cheerful but with lots of normal human problems, and issues. And some abnormal problems that arise from great wealth
Yeah...but I wonder who is happy, these days. I wouldn't say being a sigma is the recipe. Wanting to be happy is the sigma's motivation, maybe - at least, a sigma is highly driven and it's not by competitiveness; Maslovian self-actualisation is one take on it - but if there's a final goal it doesn't get realised. Freud defined happiness as the realisation of a childhood wish. There's something in that, but the sigma takes it to a higher level in a way that an alpha can't.
If people cast their minds back the launch of "Orange" was greeted with howls of derision, incomprehension, etc.
But it was a very powerful brand and I expect X to be the same. Not some marketing bollocks like Consignia or, far, far worse, abrdn (ffs) but something that people can latch onto.
I bet Jeff Bezos will be kicking himself he didn't think of it although Amazon is a good enough name but perhaps in danger of appearing slightly outdated as time marches on.
At what point does the Met need to be given the RUC treatment? It’s clear that the recent change of leadership has made little difference, and there are still weekly stories of sex offenders from the force.
“The best time to plant a tree was 30 years ago. The second best time is now.”
The fact that so many stories are coming out about bad cops is inevitable when you start to clean up. You have to grit your teeth and learn to live with the bad publicity. It is a sign that you are starting to clean up. If in a year or two this is still happening then you are in trouble.
More worrying is the default instinct of wanting to cover up, not wanting transparency etc.,. And the fact that the Met still won't accept that it has an institutional problem, whether with corruption or misogyny. That suggests a high level of denial and resistance.
Cover-ups are what we do best. 2 current stories - ambulances
At what point does the Met need to be given the RUC treatment? It’s clear that the recent change of leadership has made little difference, and there are still weekly stories of sex offenders from the force.
“The best time to plant a tree was 30 years ago. The second best time is now.”
The fact that so many stories are coming out about bad cops is inevitable when you start to clean up. You have to grit your teeth and learn to live with the bad publicity. It is a sign that you are starting to clean up. If in a year or two this is still happening then you are in trouble.
More worrying is the default instinct of wanting to cover up, not wanting transparency etc.,. And the fact that the Met still won't accept that it has an institutional problem, whether with corruption or misogyny. That suggests a high level of denial and resistance.
While you're here, and on a different matter, I was wondering if Labour's policy on trans rights, referred to by LP in an earlier post and outlined today by Dodds in The Guardian, would satisfy you (and JKR)? It does seem to include a clear sex/gender distinction, and protection of single-sex spaces.
I have been out walking the dog so apologies for the delay in replying.
It is a good start but would need to see the detail. I have written elsewhere about this so LMK if you would like a link to that.
Interesting that Labour is doing this - and good too. A sensible reform is the way to go not using transpeople or women or any other group to fight battles. The issues - and the people concerned - are too important for that.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Elon's wealth came to about $450 billion before he bought Twitter for approx $45billion. Estimates on how much the value of that $45 billion has dropped are around $30billion, which would make his current net worth about $420 billion. I think he'll be happy with that.
The problem is, there's 'wealth' and there's 'wealth'. If you have a million with (say) £100k in cash in a bank account, and £900k in a variety of stocks and shares, then that's fairly liquid.
If you have £100 million, and £99 million of that is tied up in the share price of one company - then you're wealthy, but it has side effects. Firstly, your wealth is largely tied to the fortunes of that company. If that price goes up, brilliant. If it goes down, you're a *lot* less wealthy. Secondly, if you are a major shareholder and you try to get that money out, you may crash the company's value.
Of course, Musk can do stuff like borrow against his Tesla shares - as he allegedly has in the past. But that actually reduces his 'wealth' as well...
I'd much rather have £10 million in cash (bank acc) and a variety of stocks and shares, than £100 million in one company, where I was a major shareholder.
This is a very good tip by @MikeSmithson by the way.
Sadiq has made a huge error with ulez. However, I suspect it will blow over and that he will be re-elected.
It ought to serve as a warning to Labour. It's during their third term in office that they will combine arrogance with fatigue.
History repeats itself. Has to. No one listens.
If you apply the Uxbridge swing to the London Mayoral contest, then Khan wins by the biggest margin in any London Mayoral contest.
That’s the point. ULEZ may have allowed the Tories to hold on in Uxbridge, but there was still a substantial swing against them. The underlying unpopularity of the Conservatives is the bigger factor. Lay Hall.
Or perhaps ULEZ was the reason for the massive swing 😉
I don't know much about London politics, but in a city where 46% of households don't have access to a car at all, I can't see how this can become an issue for Khan without a hysterical misinformation campaign from CCHQ. 90% of those cars are ULEZ compliant, so we are talking about less than 5% of households.
Car ownership is also strongly correlated with earnings and location. The people with cars are already likely to be voting Tory. You might find that non-ULEZ compliant cars are more likely to be owned by poorer drivers, but I'd guess this is still a very small number of possible labour voters.
There are some recent stats that suggest cycling had now overtaken driving in parts of central London, so like with all Pigou taxes, ULEZ will become a smaller issue going forward.
Virtually none of the 46% of households without access to a car are changing their vote because of ULEZ.
A lot of the households with non compliant cars are both incentived to turn out and switch.
As with VAT on private schools it makes no difference electorally that the majority support the policy, the switchers are nearly all on one side.
The gap between Khan and Bailey last time was 120,000 votes - a lot more than that will be impacted by ULEZ. If Corbyn joins the show it feels pretty tough for Khan to me. One quirk is that if Corbyn does join, it might prompt other high profile independents as not impossible the winning number could be in the mid twenties.
I reckon we'd have two Corbyns on the ballot for starters.
If Jezza delivered Susan Hall (who has the potential to become the worst mayor ever elected in a major city) to London I suspect outside of his diehard fans who don't care (and never have) about winning elections, he will lose all sympathy and it'll be a bullet to the brain of Labour's hard left for a generation.
Complete bollocks.
Every Corbyn supporter cared about winning.
It's centrists within Labour who didn't care about winning see the Forde report for evidence of the factional movement of resources at GE2107 away from the winnable marginals to centrist favourites seats with huge majorities.
I saw this same theory on Facebook yesterday. It is the Left’s new rallying cry: Starmer isn’t bothered about winning the election, he just wants to destroy true socialism.
It is, of course, complete nonsense.
That's not what I said though.
What I said is in the report commissioned by Starmer.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Elon's wealth came to about $450 billion before he bought Twitter for approx $45billion. Estimates on how much the value of that $45 billion has dropped are around $30billion, which would make his current net worth about $420 billion. I think he'll be happy with that.
The problem is, there's 'wealth' and there's 'wealth'. If you have a million with (say) £100k in cash in a bank account, and £900k in a variety of stocks and shares, then that's fairly liquid.
If you have £100 million, and £99 million of that is tied up in the share price of one company - then you're wealthy, but it has side effects. Firstly, your wealth is largely tied to the fortunes of that company. If that price goes up, brilliant. If it goes down, you're a *lot* less wealthy. Secondly, if you are a major shareholder and you try to get that money out, you may crash the company's value.
Of course, Musk can do stuff like borrow against his Tesla shares - as he allegedly has in the past. But that actually reduces his 'wealth' as well...
I'd much rather have £10 million in cash (bank acc) and a variety of stocks and shares, than £100 million in one company, where I was a major shareholder.
Weird. Why not have the £100m shares to start and sell 10% of your shares or 15% or whatever to cover any necessary tax bill to get to £10m cash plus shares.
Today's Twitter Poll: Should the UK be introducing more or less green policies, eg to target 'net zero' and cleaner air ?
In general terms which of these is CLOSEST to your view? More green policy 64.9% It's about right now 8.1% Less green policies 18.2% Dont know enough 2 answer
It still seems likely that to bring core inflation down to the 2pc target, interest rates will need to go a fair bit higher and the economy will have to be driven into recession, leading to higher unemployment.
If people cast their minds back the launch of "Orange" was greeted with howls of derision, incomprehension, etc.
But it was a very powerful brand and I expect X to be the same. Not some marketing bollocks like Consignia or, far, far worse, abrdn (ffs) but something that people can latch onto.
I bet Jeff Bezos will be kicking himself he didn't think of it although Amazon is a good enough name but perhaps in danger of appearing slightly outdated as time marches on.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Elon's wealth came to about $450 billion before he bought Twitter for approx $45billion. Estimates on how much the value of that $45 billion has dropped are around $30billion, which would make his current net worth about $420 billion. I think he'll be happy with that.
The problem is, there's 'wealth' and there's 'wealth'. If you have a million with (say) £100k in cash in a bank account, and £900k in a variety of stocks and shares, then that's fairly liquid.
If you have £100 million, and £99 million of that is tied up in the share price of one company - then you're wealthy, but it has side effects. Firstly, your wealth is largely tied to the fortunes of that company. If that price goes up, brilliant. If it goes down, you're a *lot* less wealthy. Secondly, if you are a major shareholder and you try to get that money out, you may crash the company's value.
Of course, Musk can do stuff like borrow against his Tesla shares - as he allegedly has in the past. But that actually reduces his 'wealth' as well...
I'd much rather have £10 million in cash (bank acc) and a variety of stocks and shares, than £100 million in one company, where I was a major shareholder.
Weird. Why not have the £100m shares to start and sell 10% of your shares or 15% or whatever to cover any necessary tax bill to get to £10m cash plus shares.
Because selling the £10m of shares in one go, might lead to the other £90m being worth considerably less than that, as the market reacts to your selling of the £10m.
What you can do though, is use your equity in the company as collateral for a loan. So a bank lends you the £10m, and you pay them back slowly over time, with interest, as you drip the shares onto the market.
So long as your shareholding doesn’t crash and trigger a margin call from the lender, that generally works out better both for yourself and your company.
Today's Twitter Poll: Should the UK be introducing more or less green policies, eg to target 'net zero' and cleaner air ?
In general terms which of these is CLOSEST to your view? More green policy 64.9% It's about right now 8.1% Less green policies 18.2% Dont know enough 2 answer
Remind us how well the Greens did in Uxbridge?
10% in Somerton and Frome wasn't bad.
Frome is an interesting place. When I moved to the area in 2005 it was a run down, small rural town, with not a lot going for it. It became a very 'in' place (similar to Bruton further West) for well off types looking for a nice small town with independent shops etc and its character has changed hugely. The independent market once a month is great, but my good its full of hipsters (is that still a thing?).
I am not surprised to see Greens poll that high there.
Also - annoyed that so many of the media believe its pronounced to sound as froam (to rhyme with loam). I mean they check foreign places for pronunciation, why not places about 100 miles from London?
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Elon's wealth came to about $450 billion before he bought Twitter for approx $45billion. Estimates on how much the value of that $45 billion has dropped are around $30billion, which would make his current net worth about $420 billion. I think he'll be happy with that.
The problem is, there's 'wealth' and there's 'wealth'. If you have a million with (say) £100k in cash in a bank account, and £900k in a variety of stocks and shares, then that's fairly liquid.
If you have £100 million, and £99 million of that is tied up in the share price of one company - then you're wealthy, but it has side effects. Firstly, your wealth is largely tied to the fortunes of that company. If that price goes up, brilliant. If it goes down, you're a *lot* less wealthy. Secondly, if you are a major shareholder and you try to get that money out, you may crash the company's value.
Of course, Musk can do stuff like borrow against his Tesla shares - as he allegedly has in the past. But that actually reduces his 'wealth' as well...
I'd much rather have £10 million in cash (bank acc) and a variety of stocks and shares, than £100 million in one company, where I was a major shareholder.
Weird. Why not have the £100m shares to start and sell 10% of your shares or 15% or whatever to cover any necessary tax bill to get to £10m cash plus shares.
Shares is control. The more shares, the more control. Don't sell the shares.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
Yep it is cumbersome. Tex is a bit better, texing and retexing but you are left with texes although not dreadful.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
It's a rebrand but he's also looking at expanding the X brand way beyond twitter. Folding Tesla, SpaceX into it and adding a paypal/banking competitor look to be on the horizon I think.
He’s been studying what WeChat in China, and other similar “super apps” in other Asian countries, have been doing.
The key to it all is frictionless micropayments at scale, but no-one in the West has really managed to do it so far.
They key to a successful financial platform is also trust. That's in very short supply at Musk's X venture.
There's a reason it only has worked in China though - where tech companies aren't fully autonomous of a centralised authoritarian state and consumers are used to choice only up to a point. An 'everything app' makes sense for those who control it, less so for consumers, as the gains in convenience are offset by significant drawbacks. What does make some sense is something like we have with competing but interlinked apps that replicate the convenience but also offer a certain amount of choice and independence. Hence why Facebook, which looked likely to dominate everything a decade ago, has suffered some retrenchment as a younger generation have sought out upstarts more tailored to how they consume online media. It makes sense for a consumer to have a separate payment system that prioritises security that is compatible with various competing apps that you can pick and choose whether and how you use, rather than all in one place, due to security issues and the fact that if the 'X' app goes down or you are banned for it for whatever reason, or you don't like its products or T&C's you're in trouble. Hence why Facebook/Meta has in some ways sought to artificially create that by keeping its products as separate entities that appeal to different audiences and have different uses.
It still seems likely that to bring core inflation down to the 2pc target, interest rates will need to go a fair bit higher and the economy will have to be driven into recession, leading to higher unemployment.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Elon's wealth came to about $450 billion before he bought Twitter for approx $45billion. Estimates on how much the value of that $45 billion has dropped are around $30billion, which would make his current net worth about $420 billion. I think he'll be happy with that.
The problem is, there's 'wealth' and there's 'wealth'. If you have a million with (say) £100k in cash in a bank account, and £900k in a variety of stocks and shares, then that's fairly liquid.
If you have £100 million, and £99 million of that is tied up in the share price of one company - then you're wealthy, but it has side effects. Firstly, your wealth is largely tied to the fortunes of that company. If that price goes up, brilliant. If it goes down, you're a *lot* less wealthy. Secondly, if you are a major shareholder and you try to get that money out, you may crash the company's value.
Of course, Musk can do stuff like borrow against his Tesla shares - as he allegedly has in the past. But that actually reduces his 'wealth' as well...
I'd much rather have £10 million in cash (bank acc) and a variety of stocks and shares, than £100 million in one company, where I was a major shareholder.
Weird. Why not have the £100m shares to start and sell 10% of your shares or 15% or whatever to cover any necessary tax bill to get to £10m cash plus shares.
Because selling the £10m of shares in one go, might lead to the other £90m being worth considerably less than that, as the market reacts to your selling of the £10m.
What you can do though, is use your equity in the company as collateral for a loan. So a bank lends you the £10m, and you pay them back slowly over time, with interest, as you drip the shares onto the market.
So long as your shareholding doesn’t crash and trigger a margin call from the lender, that generally works out better both for yourself and your company.
And you have to ask yourself *who* Musk is in hock to wrt Tesla and (especially) Twitter, and whether this may be influencing his comments on other matters, e.g. Ukraine...
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
The problem is as well that “Xs” either sounds like you’re referring to kisses at the end of a message, or an ex.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
The problem is as well that “Xs” either sounds like you’re referring to kisses at the end of a message, or an ex.
It still seems likely that to bring core inflation down to the 2pc target, interest rates will need to go a fair bit higher and the economy will have to be driven into recession, leading to higher unemployment.
Anyone got any tips on getting energy companies to refund money? I'm owed over £1k but cant get through to anyone to get a refund...
An email to the CEO normally works and a bit of research on the internet normally gets you a good guess to their address. I raised concerns over the way my deceased father's bills were being handled with British Gas and EDF and both came through when it finally hit their email accounts. Which supplier?
It still seems likely that to bring core inflation down to the 2pc target, interest rates will need to go a fair bit higher and the economy will have to be driven into recession, leading to higher unemployment.
Which is why we are going to have to live with somewhat higher inflation for some time to come. No government is going to fancy paying that cost.
The government doesn't control the interest rate.
They do, however, ultimately control the Bank. If the MPC started pushing interest rates up to 7 or 8% they would have plenty to say about it, especially in an election year. And interest rates alone would not be enough. A much, much tighter fiscal policy would need to supplement and support a tighter monetary policy to bring inflation back to those levels. Once again, not going to happen.
Some pictures from this morning's walk with the dog.
En route I met and chatted with an old lady sitting enjoying the view and having a cup of tea from her thermos. I thought: "One day I will be like that." And found this rather cheering.
After all this was the view.
The beach was gorgeous and the dog - here for scale - enjoyed himself immensely.
And amongst the stony part there was this - how beautiful is that.
Plus remains from the iron mine that was once here - the largest in Europe a century or so ago.
You can still see the red earth and the tiles from the mine in the land.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Is it ? As it's tied to lengthy, vacuous announcements about vaporware, it doesn't seem so to me.
If Musk wanted to build 'X', he might be in with a shout we he to start with a blank skate and $40bn in cash.
Trying to kludge something alongside a platform that he's degrading, which is also not generating cash, seems futile.
Trying to piggyback on something with 400m existing daily users, is always going to be orders of magnitude easier than trying to set something up from scratch.
Basically, “X” is back into tech startup mode, heading towards something that Musk has been talking about for two decades.
Anyone got any tips on getting energy companies to refund money? I'm owed over £1k but cant get through to anyone to get a refund...
Send a polite letter ideally by recorded delivery to the company's registered address, explaining you have previously contacted customer services without a response, state you will give them a fixed reasonable amount of time to process the refund, else you may initiate legal proceedings if no action taken.
Hopefully this will be picked up by the Legal Dept and will get some attention.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Is it ? As it's tied to lengthy, vacuous announcements about vaporware, it doesn't seem so to me.
If Musk wanted to build 'X', he might be in with a shout we he to start with a blank skate and $40bn in cash.
Trying to kludge something alongside a platform that he's degrading, which is also not generating cash, seems futile.
Trying to piggyback on something with 400m existing daily users, is always going to be orders of magnitude easier than trying to set something up from scratch.
Basically, “X” is back into tech startup mode.
In which case, why not start with a clean slate startup and give them (say) 20 billion dollars to play with?
The thing he bought for 40 billion was a name (that he has binned), a user base (and at least some of them are wandering off) and a platform (that he doesn't seem to want).
And apart from being his personal Rosebud, what's with X? Off the top of my head, there are X-rays, X rated, Xfm and the X Factor. Not sure any of them have that good connotations, and I'm someone who spent a decade working with the first of them.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
I think it's a load of shite tbh, and a weird choice* - unless he's planning to crash the whole thing into the side of a mountain and build the real 'X' from the wreckage. The only x com I'm interested in is the one that combats alien invasions.
Also dunno that there is an appetite for an 'everything app'. My phone is kind of my 'everything app'. What does X add that I (or indeed a business that sells things that I want) actually need? As for neural chips, thanks but no.
*not the name itself; 'X' is fine, if a bit porny. 'Twitter' felt slightly frivolous and silly to me. But like shit band names ('The Beatles') you just get used to it. Which is why I find it a bit odd; why give up all that recognition and brand equity?
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Is it ? As it's tied to lengthy, vacuous announcements about vaporware, it doesn't seem so to me.
If Musk wanted to build 'X', he might be in with a shout we he to start with a blank skate and $40bn in cash.
Trying to kludge something alongside a platform that he's degrading, which is also not generating cash, seems futile.
Trying to piggyback on something with 400m existing daily users, is always going to be orders of magnitude easier than trying to set something up from scratch.
Basically, “X” is back into tech startup mode, heading towards something that Musk has been talking about for two decades.
Trying to go into startup mode with several hundred million users is not going to be popular, either.
And tech startups don't have advertising execs as their CEO.
This is a very good tip by @MikeSmithson by the way.
Sadiq has made a huge error with ulez. However, I suspect it will blow over and that he will be re-elected.
It ought to serve as a warning to Labour. It's during their third term in office that they will combine arrogance with fatigue.
History repeats itself. Has to. No one listens.
If you apply the Uxbridge swing to the London Mayoral contest, then Khan wins by the biggest margin in any London Mayoral contest.
That’s the point. ULEZ may have allowed the Tories to hold on in Uxbridge, but there was still a substantial swing against them. The underlying unpopularity of the Conservatives is the bigger factor. Lay Hall.
Or perhaps ULEZ was the reason for the massive swing 😉
I don't know much about London politics, but in a city where 46% of households don't have access to a car at all, I can't see how this can become an issue for Khan without a hysterical misinformation campaign from CCHQ. 90% of those cars are ULEZ compliant, so we are talking about less than 5% of households.
Car ownership is also strongly correlated with earnings and location. The people with cars are already likely to be voting Tory. You might find that non-ULEZ compliant cars are more likely to be owned by poorer drivers, but I'd guess this is still a very small number of possible labour voters.
There are some recent stats that suggest cycling had now overtaken driving in parts of central London, so like with all Pigou taxes, ULEZ will become a smaller issue going forward.
Virtually none of the 46% of households without access to a car are changing their vote because of ULEZ.
A lot of the households with non compliant cars are both incentived to turn out and switch.
As with VAT on private schools it makes no difference electorally that the majority support the policy, the switchers are nearly all on one side.
The gap between Khan and Bailey last time was 120,000 votes - a lot more than that will be impacted by ULEZ. If Corbyn joins the show it feels pretty tough for Khan to me. One quirk is that if Corbyn does join, it might prompt other high profile independents as not impossible the winning number could be in the mid twenties.
I reckon we'd have two Corbyns on the ballot for starters.
If Jezza delivered Susan Hall (who has the potential to become the worst mayor ever elected in a major city) to London I suspect outside of his diehard fans who don't care (and never have) about winning elections, he will lose all sympathy and it'll be a bullet to the brain of Labour's hard left for a generation.
Complete bollocks.
Every Corbyn supporter cared about winning.
It's centrists within Labour who didn't care about winning see the Forde report for evidence of the factional movement of resources at GE2107 away from the winnable marginals to centrist favourites seats with huge majorities.
I saw this same theory on Facebook yesterday. It is the Left’s new rallying cry: Starmer isn’t bothered about winning the election, he just wants to destroy true socialism.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
I think it's a load of shite tbh, and a weird choice* - unless he's planning to crash the whole thing into the side of a mountain and build the real 'X' from the wreckage. The only x com I'm interested in is the one that combats alien invasions.
Also dunno that there is an appetite for an 'everything app'. My phone is kind of my 'everything app'. What does X add that I (or indeed a business that sells things that I want) actually need? As for neural chips, thanks but no.
*not the name itself; 'X' is fine, if a bit porny. 'Twitter' felt slightly frivolous and silly to me. But like shit band names ('The Beatles') you just get used to it. Which is why I find it a bit odd; why give up all that recognition and brand equity?
I mean Amazon is a pretty much "a lot of things", if not an everything app, isn't it? What don't they do? Finance? Well (how) are they regulated?
Could be a nice payday for the obsolete windowing tech bods to sell Musk the logo rights and maybe the domain too. Hoping FB will rename Threads to Wayland for the geek lols
This is a very good tip by @MikeSmithson by the way.
Sadiq has made a huge error with ulez. However, I suspect it will blow over and that he will be re-elected.
It ought to serve as a warning to Labour. It's during their third term in office that they will combine arrogance with fatigue.
History repeats itself. Has to. No one listens.
If you apply the Uxbridge swing to the London Mayoral contest, then Khan wins by the biggest margin in any London Mayoral contest.
That’s the point. ULEZ may have allowed the Tories to hold on in Uxbridge, but there was still a substantial swing against them. The underlying unpopularity of the Conservatives is the bigger factor. Lay Hall.
Or perhaps ULEZ was the reason for the massive swing 😉
I don't know much about London politics, but in a city where 46% of households don't have access to a car at all, I can't see how this can become an issue for Khan without a hysterical misinformation campaign from CCHQ. 90% of those cars are ULEZ compliant, so we are talking about less than 5% of households.
Car ownership is also strongly correlated with earnings and location. The people with cars are already likely to be voting Tory. You might find that non-ULEZ compliant cars are more likely to be owned by poorer drivers, but I'd guess this is still a very small number of possible labour voters.
There are some recent stats that suggest cycling had now overtaken driving in parts of central London, so like with all Pigou taxes, ULEZ will become a smaller issue going forward.
Virtually none of the 46% of households without access to a car are changing their vote because of ULEZ.
A lot of the households with non compliant cars are both incentived to turn out and switch.
As with VAT on private schools it makes no difference electorally that the majority support the policy, the switchers are nearly all on one side.
The gap between Khan and Bailey last time was 120,000 votes - a lot more than that will be impacted by ULEZ. If Corbyn joins the show it feels pretty tough for Khan to me. One quirk is that if Corbyn does join, it might prompt other high profile independents as not impossible the winning number could be in the mid twenties.
I reckon we'd have two Corbyns on the ballot for starters.
If Jezza delivered Susan Hall (who has the potential to become the worst mayor ever elected in a major city) to London I suspect outside of his diehard fans who don't care (and never have) about winning elections, he will lose all sympathy and it'll be a bullet to the brain of Labour's hard left for a generation.
Complete bollocks.
Every Corbyn supporter cared about winning.
It's centrists within Labour who didn't care about winning see the Forde report for evidence of the factional movement of resources at GE2107 away from the winnable marginals to centrist favourites seats with huge majorities.
Centrists in most of the marginals weren't going to vote for Corbyn even if Labour campaigned there 24/7. As 2019 proved
Corbyn didn’t want centrist votes. For every one vote he secured for himself he recruited two for his opponent. He wasn’t smart and lost badly twice.
Lost badly once. 2017 was a loss but it felt like a win vs expectations and startpoint.
However I'm now onboard with the Starmer 'NL' strategy, ie that to ensure the win at GE24 the best approach is to keep things very safe, in particular give no scope for the old 'Labour can't be trusted with your money' trope to get into play.
I don't particularly like agreeing with this - for me one of the delights of the Corbyn era was the contempt shown for Murdoch/Dacre opeds and Sun, Mail, Telegraph sensibilities - but I do agree. The evidence says it's right and my intuition says the same.
Except in Uxbridge where Starmer/NL reluctance to take on the Tories over Ulez led to defeat.
Or Ulez itself did. Hard to say really. Whatever, Uxbridge doesn't say much about GE prospects compared to Selby imo.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Is it ? As it's tied to lengthy, vacuous announcements about vaporware, it doesn't seem so to me.
If Musk wanted to build 'X', he might be in with a shout we he to start with a blank skate and $40bn in cash.
Trying to kludge something alongside a platform that he's degrading, which is also not generating cash, seems futile.
Trying to piggyback on something with 400m existing daily users, is always going to be orders of magnitude easier than trying to set something up from scratch.
Basically, “X” is back into tech startup mode.
In which case, why not start with a clean slate startup and give them (say) 20 billion dollars to play with?
The thing he bought for 40 billion was a name (that he has binned), a user base (and at least some of them are wandering off) and a platform (that he doesn't seem to want).
And apart from being his personal Rosebud, what's with X? Off the top of my head, there are X-rays, X rated, Xfm and the X Factor. Not sure any of them have that good connotations, and I'm someone who spent a decade working with the first of them.
Because the cost of acquiring 400m daily users as a startup is way, way more than $20bn. The wanderings-off are being measured in the thousands rather than the millions, at least at this stage.
Unless everyone can agree on a different platform where *everyone* will discuss the US election next year, then it’s a genius move - and if by that election he can have a platform where it costs you $10.01 to send anyone else in the world $10, he’s sitting on at least a $100bn company.
Doing some pondering. The Premier League has been the dominant league for c 20 years? But the world's very best player, Zidane, Messi, Mbappe, Ronaldo at his peak, haven't ever played in it. Checking back, the world's best player has only been won once by an EPL player. Ronaldo in 2008. He immediately left for Real. Anyone got a reason why?
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
I think it's a load of shite tbh, and a weird choice* - unless he's planning to crash the whole thing into the side of a mountain and build the real 'X' from the wreckage. The only x com I'm interested in is the one that combats alien invasions.
Also dunno that there is an appetite for an 'everything app'. My phone is kind of my 'everything app'. What does X add that I (or indeed a business that sells things that I want) actually need? As for neural chips, thanks but no.
*not the name itself; 'X' is fine, if a bit porny. 'Twitter' felt slightly frivolous and silly to me. But like shit band names ('The Beatles') you just get used to it. Which is why I find it a bit odd; why give up all that recognition and brand equity?
It should have been TwitterX, to line up with SpaceX. Then he could have a holding company called "MuskX". Why they don't pay me squillions for branding I dunno
Without Mbappe and Messi, PSG are beginning to look like a redundant and highly expensive plaything for their Qatari owners
Sure, they will win the French league every year, but who gives a fuck about that?
Without those two players, what chance do they have of the Champions League against Real and the EPL?
If I was weird enough to be a PSG fan, I’d be concerned
The French isn't much more than a feeder league for the likes of EPL these days. And their TV rights deals have been a total shit show over the past few years.
Doing some pondering. The Premier League has been the dominant league for c 20 years? But the world's very best player, Zidane, Messi, Mbappe, Ronaldo at his peak, haven't ever played in it. Checking back, the world's best player has only been won once by an EPL player. Ronaldo in 2008. Anyone got a reason why?
Because the clubs in foreign leagues will splash out on one big signature, whereas the top PL clubs can get half a dozen A-listers, which is a better approach than one superstar. One superstar dominates the nominations for awards.
Doing some pondering. The Premier League has been the dominant league for c 20 years? But the world's very best player, Zidane, Messi, Mbappe, Ronaldo at his peak, haven't ever played in it. Checking back, the world's best player has only been won once by an EPL player. Ronaldo in 2008. He immediately left for Real. Anyone got a reason why?
Doing some pondering. The Premier League has been the dominant league for c 20 years? But the world's very best player, Zidane, Messi, Mbappe, Ronaldo at his peak, haven't ever played in it. Checking back, the world's best player has only been won once by an EPL player. Ronaldo in 2008. Anyone got a reason why?
Real Madrid and Barca have always just that little bit more money and glamour. All those players were at the two Spanish clubs
Barca are now down and nearly out. So it’s Real versus the EPL
There’s a good argument to say Haaland is as fine a footballer as Mbappe, and as able to turn games. Even though they are very different players. Haaland is at City of course
Without Mbappe and Messi, PSG are beginning to look like a redundant and highly expensive plaything for their Qatari owners
Sure, they will win the French league every year, but who gives a fuck about that?
Without those two players, what chance do they have of the Champions League against Real and the EPL?
If I was weird enough to be a PSG fan, I’d be concerned
The French isn't much more than a feeder league for the likes of EPL these days. And their TV rights deals have been a total shit show over the past few years.
PSG looks increasingly like an expensive gamble that hasn’t paid off. They REALLY needed the Super League to happen
Reports that a Saudi team have offered €300m for Mbappe
With a salary of - wait for it - €700m A YEAR
Mbappe is a genius of a player, but that is a ridiculous salary.
This is all Twitter gossip so who knows. The idea is he’d play for one season in Saudi then be free to leave for Real
I can’t see what’s in this for the Saudis. Yes they are insanely rich but €1bn for one player for one season?! What’s the point
Also I don’t think mbappe would ever go to Saudi. Not at this peak career moment. He’ll go to Real, or, failing that, maybe a Chelsea
You are not quite understanding wealth. $1bn is nothing if you have $X,XXXbn or whatever. It is why billionaires happily buy (or try to buy) entire London streets because why not. If you are worth £5bn, and a house in Chelsea costs, say, £10m, then why not buy 20-30 (or more) of them because although in relative terms it is still a chunk of your net worth you still have several billion left.
Is how that world works.
I visited a few various art galleries in Munich a few years ago, wonder how long it'll be before the great European artworks (Rubens, Caravaggio, Da Vinci etc etc) of the renaissance end up in the middle east. Some like the Mona Lisa won't go anywhere, but the Rubens might..
Most of the good art has long since been bought by Americans. What might be vulnerable is the second division stuff in small or municipal galleries whose heads can be swayed by large bags of gold.
Doing some pondering. The Premier League has been the dominant league for c 20 years? But the world's very best player, Zidane, Messi, Mbappe, Ronaldo at his peak, haven't ever played in it. Checking back, the world's best player has only been won once by an EPL player. Ronaldo in 2008. Anyone got a reason why?
Because the clubs foreign leagues will splash out on one big signature, whereas the top PL clubs can get half a dozen A-listers, which is a better approach than one superstar.
There is probably a little bit of an issue around the weather / stereotypes around the cities of the big clubs. Outside of London, no matter how much on the up Manchester is, it doesn't quite have the glamour (or weather) of Madrid or Barcelona.
Also, EPL is a hard league. Every game is extremely competitive, its physically tougher than say La Liga. Where as you can play for Real Madrid, and coast for half the season, while also guaranteed you will be a) in the running for winning the league and b) in the Champions League every year.
Today's Twitter Poll: Should the UK be introducing more or less green policies, eg to target 'net zero' and cleaner air ?
In general terms which of these is CLOSEST to your view? More green policy 64.9% It's about right now 8.1% Less green policies 18.2% Dont know enough 2 answer
Remind us how well the Greens did in Uxbridge?
10% in Somerton and Frome wasn't bad.
Frome is an interesting place. When I moved to the area in 2005 it was a run down, small rural town, with not a lot going for it. It became a very 'in' place (similar to Bruton further West) for well off types looking for a nice small town with independent shops etc and its character has changed hugely. The independent market once a month is great, but my good its full of hipsters (is that still a thing?).
I am not surprised to see Greens poll that high there.
Also - annoyed that so many of the media believe its pronounced to sound as froam (to rhyme with loam). I mean they check foreign places for pronunciation, why not places about 100 miles from London?
The ought to change the spelling of the place to Froome. It's very unusual to have somewhere with that particular combination of spelling and pronunciation.
Anyone got any tips on getting energy companies to refund money? I'm owed over £1k but cant get through to anyone to get a refund...
Lufthansa owe us a few hundred pounds for cancelling a flight in February which caused us to have to take an unexpected train journey to London to get a flight from a different airport. We've tried everything but they won't reply.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
I think it's a load of shite tbh, and a weird choice* - unless he's planning to crash the whole thing into the side of a mountain and build the real 'X' from the wreckage. The only x com I'm interested in is the one that combats alien invasions.
Also dunno that there is an appetite for an 'everything app'. My phone is kind of my 'everything app'. What does X add that I (or indeed a business that sells things that I want) actually need? As for neural chips, thanks but no.
*not the name itself; 'X' is fine, if a bit porny. 'Twitter' felt slightly frivolous and silly to me. But like shit band names ('The Beatles') you just get used to it. Which is why I find it a bit odd; why give up all that recognition and brand equity?
It should have been TwitterX, to line up with SpaceX. Then he could have a holding company called "MuskX". Why they don't pay me squillions for branding I dunno
Plus I have to point out that as Elon has the self control of a 15yr old who has just seen boobies and named his Tesla cars S, 3, X, Y, then the porny sound of calling Twitter "X" probably appealed to him when he was doing his best thinking in the toilet with one hand...
It still seems likely that to bring core inflation down to the 2pc target, interest rates will need to go a fair bit higher and the economy will have to be driven into recession, leading to higher unemployment.
Which is why we are going to have to live with somewhat higher inflation for some time to come. No government is going to fancy paying that cost.
The government doesn't control the interest rate.
They do, however, ultimately control the Bank. If the MPC started pushing interest rates up to 7 or 8% they would have plenty to say about it, especially in an election year. And interest rates alone would not be enough. A much, much tighter fiscal policy would need to supplement and support a tighter monetary policy to bring inflation back to those levels. Once again, not going to happen.
The Bank likes to think in terms of inflation *in the medium term*, so will want it back at 2% or so in around 24 months, or that's what it'll tell itself.
And to get there, you need to make all sorts of assumptions about oil and energy prices which are, essentially, subjective - which in turn means you can justify interest rates at quite a wide range and still say you'll hit 2%.
Of course, that's different from actually hitting 2% but everyone will be 2 years down the line by then and 'events, dear boy'.
Anyone got any tips on getting energy companies to refund money? I'm owed over £1k but cant get through to anyone to get a refund...
Lufthansa owe us a few hundred pounds for cancelling a flight in February which caused us to have to take an unexpected train journey to London to get a flight from a different airport. We've tried everything but they won't reply.
Anyone got any tips on getting energy companies to refund money? I'm owed over £1k but cant get through to anyone to get a refund...
Lufthansa owe us a few hundred pounds for cancelling a flight in February which caused us to have to take an unexpected train journey to London to get a flight from a different airport. We've tried everything but they won't reply.
Doing some pondering. The Premier League has been the dominant league for c 20 years? But the world's very best player, Zidane, Messi, Mbappe, Ronaldo at his peak, haven't ever played in it. Checking back, the world's best player has only been won once by an EPL player. Ronaldo in 2008. Anyone got a reason why?
Real Madrid and Barca have always just that little bit more money and glamour. All those players were at the two Spanish clubs
Barca are now down and nearly out. So it’s Real versus the EPL
There’s a good argument to say Haaland is as fine a footballer as Mbappe, and as able to turn games. Even though they are very different players. Haaland is at City of course
Its probably also not a bad move to ensure you maximise the length of your career, hence Ronaldo and Messi still playing in their late 30s. You can coast for a lot of the games, where as Haaland plays on the limit and gets properly bashed up every week.
Its like we are seeing with some of these young cricketers, they aren't playing 4/5 day cricket, some don't even play 50 over cricket. They just specialise in T20, where a) there is a load of money and b) they know the risk of injury from constant long spells of punishment are reduced.
Where as Ben Stokes is down to operating on one leg at the ripe old age of 32. He probably lost several million quid compared to if he had just gone and got his knee sorted and said I only play T20 now.
Boundary changes have done for her. There is no Copeland. It's Whitehaven and Workington now. Or Barrow and Furness. Neither are better for the Tories than Copeland was. @Cyclefree may know better, as I strongly suspect she'd be her MP? I believe she has said so in the past.
The boundaries have changed so she would likely have lost anyway. The MP from the next constituency along has been a better Tory MP than her (though he will likely also lose). But if he does stand for the revised constituency and wins he'll be one of the better ones.
She's nice enough (tho' I can't possibly repeat on here the gossip I have about her) but a bit useless, even on local matters. Husband who knows her well gave up on her ages ago.
Anyone got any tips on getting energy companies to refund money? I'm owed over £1k but cant get through to anyone to get a refund...
Lufthansa owe us a few hundred pounds for cancelling a flight in February which caused us to have to take an unexpected train journey to London. We've tried everything but they won't reply.
Policy. I spent a year trying to get a few hundred quid out of norwegian air. no joy. Issued proceedings online, settled in 48 hours.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
I think it's a load of shite tbh, and a weird choice* - unless he's planning to crash the whole thing into the side of a mountain and build the real 'X' from the wreckage. The only x com I'm interested in is the one that combats alien invasions.
Also dunno that there is an appetite for an 'everything app'. My phone is kind of my 'everything app'. What does X add that I (or indeed a business that sells things that I want) actually need? As for neural chips, thanks but no.
*not the name itself; 'X' is fine, if a bit porny. 'Twitter' felt slightly frivolous and silly to me. But like shit band names ('The Beatles') you just get used to it. Which is why I find it a bit odd; why give up all that recognition and brand equity?
It should have been TwitterX, to line up with SpaceX. Then he could have a holding company called "MuskX". Why they don't pay me squillions for branding I dunno
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
I think it's a load of shite tbh, and a weird choice* - unless he's planning to crash the whole thing into the side of a mountain and build the real 'X' from the wreckage. The only x com I'm interested in is the one that combats alien invasions.
Also dunno that there is an appetite for an 'everything app'. My phone is kind of my 'everything app'. What does X add that I (or indeed a business that sells things that I want) actually need? As for neural chips, thanks but no.
*not the name itself; 'X' is fine, if a bit porny. 'Twitter' felt slightly frivolous and silly to me. But like shit band names ('The Beatles') you just get used to it. Which is why I find it a bit odd; why give up all that recognition and brand equity?
It should have been TwitterX, to line up with SpaceX. Then he could have a holding company called "MuskX". Why they don't pay me squillions for branding I dunno
Anyone got any tips on getting energy companies to refund money? I'm owed over £1k but cant get through to anyone to get a refund...
Lufthansa owe us a few hundred pounds for cancelling a flight in February which caused us to have to take an unexpected train journey to London to get a flight from a different airport. We've tried everything but they won't reply.
Sue them with a small claim.
Many of you (who am I kidding, nobody else here shops at Morrisons ) will be unfamiliar with the small claims court. DavidL can fill you in on the details
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
I think it's a load of shite tbh, and a weird choice* - unless he's planning to crash the whole thing into the side of a mountain and build the real 'X' from the wreckage. The only x com I'm interested in is the one that combats alien invasions.
Also dunno that there is an appetite for an 'everything app'. My phone is kind of my 'everything app'. What does X add that I (or indeed a business that sells things that I want) actually need? As for neural chips, thanks but no.
*not the name itself; 'X' is fine, if a bit porny. 'Twitter' felt slightly frivolous and silly to me. But like shit band names ('The Beatles') you just get used to it. Which is why I find it a bit odd; why give up all that recognition and brand equity?
It should have been TwitterX, to line up with SpaceX. Then he could have a holding company called "MuskX". Why they don't pay me squillions for branding I dunno
X is an utterly shit logo and brand. With everything in black and grey. Euurgh!
A brand designed by tiresome teenage boys for tiresome teenage boys.
Doing some pondering. The Premier League has been the dominant league for c 20 years? But the world's very best player, Zidane, Messi, Mbappe, Ronaldo at his peak, haven't ever played in it. Checking back, the world's best player has only been won once by an EPL player. Ronaldo in 2008. He immediately left for Real. Anyone got a reason why?
Crazy talk. Best players to have played in the Premier League:
Thierry Henry Robert Pires Frederik Ljungberg Dennis Bergkamp Ashley Cole etc
The boundaries have changed so she would likely have lost anyway. The MP from the next constituency along has been a better Tory MP than her (though he will likely also lose). But if he does stand for the revised constituency and wins he'll be one of the better ones.
She's nice enough (tho' I can't possibly repeat on here the gossip I have about her) but a bit useless, even on local matters. Husband who knows her well gave up on her ages ago.
She's a liar. Was complicit in that awful man trying to airlift pet dogs from Kabul, claimed she was involved in her own right as MP [awful man lives 100s of miles from her constituency] when she was plainly doing it as Johnson's PPS.
Reports that a Saudi team have offered €300m for Mbappe
With a salary of - wait for it - €700m A YEAR
Obscene.
It’s quite possibly nonsense. Maybe spread by the Saudis themselves just to say: Look how much money we have
Mbappe, a sublime talent, just 24, stripped of his dignity, turned into a circus act. That's what this would do if it's true (which I hope it isn't).
Yeah but even for him… €700m?!
And it’s just one season then he goes to Real for free
PSG really want this to happen as the alternative seems to be Mbappe sulking on the bench for a whole season (he and the team have entirely fallen out) then his contract expires and he goes to Real and PSG get nothing
It still seems likely that to bring core inflation down to the 2pc target, interest rates will need to go a fair bit higher and the economy will have to be driven into recession, leading to higher unemployment.
Which is why we are going to have to live with somewhat higher inflation for some time to come. No government is going to fancy paying that cost.
The government doesn't control the interest rate.
They do, however, ultimately control the Bank. If the MPC started pushing interest rates up to 7 or 8% they would have plenty to say about it, especially in an election year. And interest rates alone would not be enough. A much, much tighter fiscal policy would need to supplement and support a tighter monetary policy to bring inflation back to those levels. Once again, not going to happen.
The Bank likes to think in terms of inflation *in the medium term*, so will want it back at 2% or so in around 24 months, or that's what it'll tell itself.
And to get there, you need to make all sorts of assumptions about oil and energy prices which are, essentially, subjective - which in turn means you can justify interest rates at quite a wide range and still say you'll hit 2%.
Of course, that's different from actually hitting 2% but everyone will be 2 years down the line by then and 'events, dear boy'.
The problem with inflation is that the UK seems exceptionally prone to secondary effects. Hence the government’s current obsession with wages. We don’t need high oil prices to generate inflation. Once we get the spark it will feed on itself. Some of this is because we are such a service dominated economy. Some because we have done so poorly with productivity. Wage increases without output increases are by definition inflationary. My priority as a trustee of a pension fund has been to ensure that the fund is as inflation proofed as possible for the foreseeable future. I don’t believe a word the Bank says about it.
The boundaries have changed so she would likely have lost anyway. The MP from the next constituency along has been a better Tory MP than her (though he will likely also lose). But if he does stand for the revised constituency and wins he'll be one of the better ones.
She's nice enough (tho' I can't possibly repeat on here the gossip I have about her) but a bit useless, even on local matters. Husband who knows her well gave up on her ages ago.
She's a liar. Was complicit in that awful man trying to airlift pet dogs from Kabul, claimed she was involved in her own right as MP [awful man lives 100s of miles from her constituency] when she was plainly doing it as Johnson's PPS.
It still seems likely that to bring core inflation down to the 2pc target, interest rates will need to go a fair bit higher and the economy will have to be driven into recession, leading to higher unemployment.
Doing some pondering. The Premier League has been the dominant league for c 20 years? But the world's very best player, Zidane, Messi, Mbappe, Ronaldo at his peak, haven't ever played in it. Checking back, the world's best player has only been won once by an EPL player. Ronaldo in 2008. He immediately left for Real. Anyone got a reason why?
Crazy talk. Best players to have played in the Premier League:
Thierry Henry Robert Pires Frederik Ljungberg Dennis Bergkamp Ashley Cole etc
Frederik Ljungberg is not in the company of the other Arsenal players on that list.
I saw the one with the Russia flag and thought "Why's that there - can't be that old, early 90s, wasn't it?". Then realised it was from the Russia before the USSR.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Surprised you think X is more memorable. Nobody forgets Twitter. Just guessing, but "X" might have more power in China or India? Or it could just be that this is this month's way for Musk to get himself on the front pages, after the cage fight challenge. Did he not have x.com in his back pocket from the days of the run-up to Paypal? But the most interesting possibility is that the plan really is to integrate Twitter into an "everything app" perhaps based around microchip implants (Neuralink).
X is potentially pretty good
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
I think it's a load of shite tbh, and a weird choice* - unless he's planning to crash the whole thing into the side of a mountain and build the real 'X' from the wreckage. The only x com I'm interested in is the one that combats alien invasions.
Also dunno that there is an appetite for an 'everything app'. My phone is kind of my 'everything app'. What does X add that I (or indeed a business that sells things that I want) actually need? As for neural chips, thanks but no.
*not the name itself; 'X' is fine, if a bit porny. 'Twitter' felt slightly frivolous and silly to me. But like shit band names ('The Beatles') you just get used to it. Which is why I find it a bit odd; why give up all that recognition and brand equity?
It should have been TwitterX, to line up with SpaceX. Then he could have a holding company called "MuskX". Why they don't pay me squillions for branding I dunno
X is an utterly shit logo and brand. With everything in black and grey. Euurgh!
A brand designed by tiresome teenage boys for tiresome teenage boys.
The CEO is a woman.
https://twitter.com/lindayacc/status/1683213895463215104 X is the future state of unlimited interactivity – centered in audio, video, messaging, payments/banking – creating a global marketplace for ideas, goods, services, and opportunities. Powered by AI, X will connect us all in ways we’re just beginning to imagine...
...There’s absolutely no limit to this transformation. X will be the platform that can deliver, well….everything. @elonmusk and I are looking forward to working with our teams and every single one of our partners to bring X to the world.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Is it ? As it's tied to lengthy, vacuous announcements about vaporware, it doesn't seem so to me.
If Musk wanted to build 'X', he might be in with a shout we he to start with a blank skate and $40bn in cash.
Trying to kludge something alongside a platform that he's degrading, which is also not generating cash, seems futile.
Trying to piggyback on something with 400m existing daily users, is always going to be orders of magnitude easier than trying to set something up from scratch.
Basically, “X” is back into tech startup mode.
In which case, why not start with a clean slate startup and give them (say) 20 billion dollars to play with?
The thing he bought for 40 billion was a name (that he has binned), a user base (and at least some of them are wandering off) and a platform (that he doesn't seem to want).
And apart from being his personal Rosebud, what's with X? Off the top of my head, there are X-rays, X rated, Xfm and the X Factor. Not sure any of them have that good connotations, and I'm someone who spent a decade working with the first of them.
Because the cost of acquiring 400m daily users as a startup is way, way more than $20bn. The wanderings-off are being measured in the thousands rather than the millions, at least at this stage.
Unless everyone can agree on a different platform where *everyone* will discuss the US election next year, then it’s a genius move - and if by that election he can have a platform where it costs you $10.01 to send anyone else in the world $10, he’s sitting on at least a $100bn company.
Thanks. Cost of acquiring clients is one of the many things I don't hav to worry about. Lucky me.
As a rebrand, X is potentially superior to Meta and Alphabet (neither of which has really worked, except perhaps on some obscure accounting basis)
Yeah, but Meta and Alphabet are corporate-facing brands. Alphabet is entirely corporate; I don't think I've ever noticed it on a Google property. "Meta" shows up as a subtitle on some of the company's products.
Musk appears to want to replace the consumer-facing Twitter brand entirely with the X brand. It's not "Twitter from X" in the same way as "Facebook from Meta", it's just "X".
Yes, X is superior and more memorable, but it is a big risk
However, Musk could be feeling that he’s taken such flak since he bought Twitter he might as well have fun with it: experiment wildly
He’s not gonna go personally bankrupt
Given that what he wants to do with twitter is very different to most people's perceptions of what twitter is, then a rebrand makes a lot of sense in terms of creating a blank canvas on which to project a new perception.
I have my doubts as to whether he will be successful. There's a tension between the ostensible goal of the "everything app" and having twitter be the ego-stroking alt-right echo chamber that he's enjoying so much in between running proper business ventures like Tesla and SpaceX.
Anyone got any tips on getting energy companies to refund money? I'm owed over £1k but cant get through to anyone to get a refund...
Lufthansa owe us a few hundred pounds for cancelling a flight in February which caused us to have to take an unexpected train journey to London to get a flight from a different airport. We've tried everything but they won't reply.
Puzzle. Ukraine has a GDP per capita of $5000 tops. This is its second city. It is also AT WAR. Yet it is cleaner and more handsome than almost any similar-sized British city
eg There’s no litter. We are ten times richer yet our cities are strewn with detritus and no one apparently cares
Puzzle. Ukraine has a GDP per capita of $5000 tops. This is its second city. It is also AT WAR. Yet it is cleaner and more handsome than almost any similar-sized British city
eg There’s no litter. We are ten times richer yet our cities are strewn with detritus and no one apparently cares
San Fransisco is miles richer than any of our cities on a per cap basis, and yet it is swimming in shit.
Comments
You never know what filth and immoral content you’ll find on that website.
RIP George.
But it was a very powerful brand and I expect X to be the same. Not some marketing bollocks like Consignia or, far, far worse, abrdn (ffs) but something that people can latch onto.
I bet Jeff Bezos will be kicking himself he didn't think of it although Amazon is a good enough name but perhaps in danger of appearing slightly outdated as time marches on.
Here is Orange's launch ad: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5o5DoNvtsY0
It is a good start but would need to see the detail. I have written elsewhere about this so LMK if you would like a link to that.
Interesting that Labour is doing this - and good too. A sensible reform is the way to go not using transpeople or women or any other group to fight battles. The issues - and the people concerned - are too important for that.
If you have £100 million, and £99 million of that is tied up in the share price of one company - then you're wealthy, but it has side effects. Firstly, your wealth is largely tied to the fortunes of that company. If that price goes up, brilliant. If it goes down, you're a *lot* less wealthy. Secondly, if you are a major shareholder and you try to get that money out, you may crash the company's value.
Of course, Musk can do stuff like borrow against his Tesla shares - as he allegedly has in the past. But that actually reduces his 'wealth' as well...
I'd much rather have £10 million in cash (bank acc) and a variety of stocks and shares, than £100 million in one company, where I was a major shareholder.
What I said is in the report commissioned by Starmer.
Roger Bootle:
It still seems likely that to bring core inflation down to the 2pc target, interest rates will need to go a fair bit higher and the economy will have to be driven into recession, leading to higher unemployment.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2023/07/23/interest-rate-pain-will-continue-despite-falling-inflation/
Abrdn was just WEIRD
What you can do though, is use your equity in the company as collateral for a loan. So a bank lends you the £10m, and you pay them back slowly over time, with interest, as you drip the shares onto the market.
So long as your shareholding doesn’t crash and trigger a margin call from the lender, that generally works out better both for yourself and your company.
I am not surprised to see Greens poll that high there.
Also - annoyed that so many of the media believe its pronounced to sound as froam (to rhyme with loam). I mean they check foreign places for pronunciation, why not places about 100 miles from London?
But there is an issue with terms that refer specifically to Twitter and the Twitter experience. Musk is suggesting tweets will become X’s. What, really? And how about retweets? Hmm
https://twitter.com/anothercohen/status/1683282922617315329?s=20
As it's tied to lengthy, vacuous announcements about vaporware, it doesn't seem so to me.
If Musk wanted to build 'X', he might be in with a shout we he to start with a blank skate and $40bn in cash.
Trying to kludge something alongside a platform that he's degrading, which is also not generating cash, seems futile.
Kylian Mbappe: Al Hilal make £259m offer for PSG
https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/66291108
En route I met and chatted with an old lady sitting enjoying the view and having a cup of tea from her thermos. I thought: "One day I will be like that." And found this rather cheering.
After all this was the view.
The beach was gorgeous and the dog - here for scale - enjoyed himself immensely.
And amongst the stony part there was this - how beautiful is that.
Plus remains from the iron mine that was once here - the largest in Europe a century or so ago.
You can still see the red earth and the tiles from the mine in the land.
The truly amazing thing is that - allegedly - the Saudis are promising to pay Mbappe a €700 million salary, for one season
Basically, “X” is back into tech startup mode, heading towards something that Musk has been talking about for two decades.
Hopefully this will be picked up by the Legal Dept and will get some attention.
The thing he bought for 40 billion was a name (that he has binned), a user base (and at least some of them are wandering off) and a platform (that he doesn't seem to want).
And apart from being his personal Rosebud, what's with X? Off the top of my head, there are X-rays, X rated, Xfm and the X Factor. Not sure any of them have that good connotations, and I'm someone who spent a decade working with the first of them.
Also dunno that there is an appetite for an 'everything app'. My phone is kind of my 'everything app'. What does X add that I (or indeed a business that sells things that I want) actually need? As for neural chips, thanks but no.
*not the name itself; 'X' is fine, if a bit porny. 'Twitter' felt slightly frivolous and silly to me. But like shit band names ('The Beatles') you just get used to it. Which is why I find it a bit odd; why give up all that recognition and brand equity?
And tech startups don't have advertising execs as their CEO.
Could be a nice payday for the obsolete windowing tech bods to sell Musk the logo rights and maybe the domain too. Hoping FB will rename Threads to Wayland for the geek lols
Sure, they will win the French league every year, but who gives a fuck about that?
Without those two players, what chance do they have of the Champions League against Real and the EPL?
If I was weird enough to be a PSG fan, I’d be concerned
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-66290041
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copeland_(UK_Parliament_constituency)
Unless everyone can agree on a different platform where *everyone* will discuss the US election next year, then it’s a genius move - and if by that election he can have a platform where it costs you $10.01 to send anyone else in the world $10, he’s sitting on at least a $100bn company.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2023/03/dads-army-list-of-russian-army.html?m=1
The Premier League has been the dominant league for c 20 years?
But the world's very best player, Zidane, Messi, Mbappe, Ronaldo at his peak, haven't ever played in it.
Checking back, the world's best player has only been won once by an EPL player.
Ronaldo in 2008.
He immediately left for Real.
Anyone got a reason why?
They may do better without.
They barely won the French League last year.
Barca are now down and nearly out. So it’s Real versus the EPL
There’s a good argument to say Haaland is as fine a footballer as Mbappe, and as able to turn games. Even though they are very different players. Haaland is at City of course
Also, EPL is a hard league. Every game is extremely competitive, its physically tougher than say La Liga. Where as you can play for Real Madrid, and coast for half the season, while also guaranteed you will be a) in the running for winning the league and b) in the Champions League every year.
I stand by my prediction of several months ago, that they’ll be dragging T-34s out of museums and off WWII memorial plinths by the end of the summer.
And to get there, you need to make all sorts of assumptions about oil and energy prices which are, essentially, subjective - which in turn means you can justify interest rates at quite a wide range and still say you'll hit 2%.
Of course, that's different from actually hitting 2% but everyone will be 2 years down the line by then and 'events, dear boy'.
I hope.
https://airlinesoffice.com/ticket_office/lufthansa/london.htm
Send them a letter by recorded delivery.
Its like we are seeing with some of these young cricketers, they aren't playing 4/5 day cricket, some don't even play 50 over cricket. They just specialise in T20, where a) there is a load of money and b) they know the risk of injury from constant long spells of punishment are reduced.
Where as Ben Stokes is down to operating on one leg at the ripe old age of 32. He probably lost several million quid compared to if he had just gone and got his knee sorted and said I only play T20 now.
There is no Copeland. It's Whitehaven and Workington now.
Or Barrow and Furness.
Neither are better for the Tories than Copeland was.
@Cyclefree may know better, as I strongly suspect she'd be her MP? I believe she has said so in the past.
The boundaries have changed so she would likely have lost anyway. The MP from the next constituency along has been a better Tory MP than her (though he will likely also lose). But if he does stand for the revised constituency and wins he'll be one of the better ones.
She's nice enough (tho' I can't possibly repeat on here the gossip I have about her) but a bit useless, even on local matters. Husband who knows her well gave up on her ages ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eike_Batista?wprov=sfla1
A brand designed by tiresome teenage boys for tiresome teenage boys.
Thierry Henry
Robert Pires
Frederik Ljungberg
Dennis Bergkamp
Ashley Cole
etc
Gove’s Cambridge housing development plans ‘nonsense’, says Tory MP
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2023/jul/24/tory-mp-anthony-browne-michael-gove-cambridge-housing-development-planning
And it’s just one season then he goes to Real for free
PSG really want this to happen as the alternative seems to be Mbappe sulking on the bench for a whole season (he and the team have entirely fallen out) then his contract expires and he goes to Real and PSG get nothing
Business growth well down in the US, Europe, and here.
The problem with inflation is that the UK seems exceptionally prone to secondary effects. Hence the government’s current obsession with wages. We don’t need high oil prices to generate inflation. Once we get the spark it will feed on itself.
Some of this is because we are such a service dominated economy. Some because we have done so poorly with productivity. Wage increases without output increases are by definition inflationary.
My priority as a trustee of a pension fund has been to ensure that the fund is as inflation proofed as possible for the foreseeable future. I don’t believe a word the Bank says about it.
https://twitter.com/lindayacc/status/1683213895463215104
X is the future state of unlimited interactivity – centered in audio, video, messaging, payments/banking – creating a global marketplace for ideas, goods, services, and opportunities. Powered by AI, X will connect us all in ways we’re just beginning to imagine...
...There’s absolutely no limit to this transformation. X will be the platform that can deliver, well….everything. @elonmusk and I are looking forward to working with our teams and every single one of our partners to bring X to the world.
I have my doubts as to whether he will be successful. There's a tension between the ostensible goal of the "everything app" and having twitter be the ego-stroking alt-right echo chamber that he's enjoying so much in between running proper business ventures like Tesla and SpaceX.
eg There’s no litter. We are ten times richer yet our cities are strewn with detritus and no one apparently cares