Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Andy Burnham backers please explain yourselves – politicalbetting.com

12467

Comments

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,918
    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    On current polls they may achieve neither given the swing from SNP to Labour.

    Not that Sunak or Starmer will care less what Yousaf proposed and the SNP conference decided
    There is every chance they could be bigger than the rump of the Tory party left given current popularity.
    Actually on current Scotland only polls the Tories may even gain seats in Scotland as well as Labour as the SNP are down about 10% on 2019 and the Scottish Conservatives only down about 6%
  • malcolmgmalcolmg Posts: 43,319
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    On current polls they may achieve neither given the swing from SNP to Labour.

    Not that Sunak or Starmer will care less what Yousaf proposed and the SNP conference decided
    There is every chance they could be bigger than the rump of the Tory party left given current popularity.
    Actually on current Scotland only polls the Tories may even gain seats in Scotland as well as Labour as the SNP are down about 10% on 2019 and the Scottish Conservatives only down about 6%
    6% of very little is not much right enough
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    On current polls they may achieve neither given the swing from SNP to Labour.

    Not that Sunak or Starmer will care less what Yousaf proposed and the SNP conference decided
    There is every chance they could be bigger than the rump of the Tory party left given current popularity.
    Actually on current Scotland only polls the Tories may even gain seats in Scotland as well as Labour as the SNP are down about 10% on 2019 and the Scottish Conservatives only down about 6%
    I'm interested in Alba (I realise those are words never before uttered by a human being).

    Do they stand anyway and take a couple of percent from the SNP, which could cost them a few seats if things are tight?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663

    Foxy said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Can I suggest there has never been a better set of quarter finals in ANY sport, ever?

    You can suggest it.

    You can also suggest the moon is made of cream cheese.
    So your counter-suggestion is....?
    Everyone can see the moon is made of Swiss cheese. Some of the holes are visible.
    A variant of Wensleydale, surely?
    Occasionally it turns to Stilton - about once in a blue moon.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    So the idea is they could lose a bunch of MPs and use that as a mandate for another independence referendum. Hmm. Run that past me again. Humza.
    If they have a majority that's it. It was good enough for Mrs Thatcher, remember.
    Holyrood wasn't even created when Thatcher was PM and she is no longer even alive.

    Instead as the UK SC confirmed if Unionists have a majority across the UK, then Westminster can block an indyref2 indefinitely
    Thank you for clarifying that Margaret Thatcher is no longer even alive.
  • MalmesburyMalmesbury Posts: 50,249

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    So the idea is they could lose a bunch of MPs and use that as a mandate for another independence referendum. Hmm. Run that past me again. Humza.
    If they have a majority that's it. It was good enough for Mrs Thatcher, remember.
    Holyrood wasn't even created when Thatcher was PM and she is no longer even alive.

    Instead as the UK SC confirmed if Unionists have a majority across the UK, then Westminster can block an indyref2 indefinitely
    Thank you for clarifying that Margaret Thatcher is no longer even alive.
    Is @HYUFD about? Want to verify the status of Franco….
  • Did you hear about the psephologist from Warsaw who moved to Haiti?

    He became a Voodoo Pole!

    (I thank you!)
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    So the idea is they could lose a bunch of MPs and use that as a mandate for another independence referendum. Hmm. Run that past me again. Humza.
    If they have a majority that's it. It was good enough for Mrs Thatcher, remember.
    Holyrood wasn't even created when Thatcher was PM and she is no longer even alive.

    Instead as the UK SC confirmed if Unionists have a majority across the UK, then Westminster can block an indyref2 indefinitely
    Thank you for clarifying that Margaret Thatcher is no longer even alive.
    She lives on in the hearts of protonostalgic Conservatives and unreformed 80's throwback leftists.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,376

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    So the idea is they could lose a bunch of MPs and use that as a mandate for another independence referendum. Hmm. Run that past me again. Humza.
    If they have a majority that's it. It was good enough for Mrs Thatcher, remember.
    Holyrood wasn't even created when Thatcher was PM and she is no longer even alive.

    Instead as the UK SC confirmed if Unionists have a majority across the UK, then Westminster can block an indyref2 indefinitely
    Thank you for clarifying that Margaret Thatcher is no longer even alive.
    Like Bill Withers, she’s no longer with us.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 71,373

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    So the idea is they could lose a bunch of MPs and use that as a mandate for another independence referendum. Hmm. Run that past me again. Humza.
    If they have a majority that's it. It was good enough for Mrs Thatcher, remember.
    Holyrood wasn't even created when Thatcher was PM and she is no longer even alive.

    Instead as the UK SC confirmed if Unionists have a majority across the UK, then Westminster can block an indyref2 indefinitely
    Thank you for clarifying that Margaret Thatcher is no longer even alive.
    Even dead she haunts the dreams of both Labour and the Tories.

    Hard to think of another Prime Minister who exerted such an extraordinary and divisive stranglehold on British politics so long after death. Pitt and Peel, perhaps, but very few others.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,424
    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    So the idea is they could lose a bunch of MPs and use that as a mandate for another independence referendum. Hmm. Run that past me again. Humza.
    If they have a majority that's it. It was good enough for Mrs Thatcher, remember.
    Holyrood wasn't even created when Thatcher was PM and she is no longer even alive.

    Instead as the UK SC confirmed if Unionists have a majority across the UK, then Westminster can block an indyref2 indefinitely
    Thank you for clarifying that Margaret Thatcher is no longer even alive.
    Even dead she haunts the dreams of both Labour and the Tories.

    Hard to think of another Prime Minister who exerted such an extraordinary and divisive stranglehold on British politics so long after death. Pitt and Peel, perhaps, but very few others.
    Winston Churchill?
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,918

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    So the idea is they could lose a bunch of MPs and use that as a mandate for another independence referendum. Hmm. Run that past me again. Humza.
    If they have a majority that's it. It was good enough for Mrs Thatcher, remember.
    Holyrood wasn't even created when Thatcher was PM and she is no longer even alive.

    Instead as the UK SC confirmed if Unionists have a majority across the UK, then Westminster can block an indyref2 indefinitely
    Thank you for clarifying that Margaret Thatcher is no longer even alive.
    Even dead she haunts the dreams of both Labour and the Tories.

    Hard to think of another Prime Minister who exerted such an extraordinary and divisive stranglehold on British politics so long after death. Pitt and Peel, perhaps, but very few others.
    Winston Churchill?
    1 Churchill
    2 Thatcher
    3 Gladstone

    The most dominant PMs of all time in my view
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Weird feeling France might - relatively - trounce SA

    Feel free to laugh at me later
  • Did you hear about the psephologist from Warsaw who moved to Haiti?

    He became a Voodoo Pole!

    (I thank you!)
    Yes I did, because you've told that one before.... :smiley:
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,376
    Morons shouting during the minutes silence.

  • Gut feeling, this will be another term for PiS, even if narrowly.
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    So the idea is they could lose a bunch of MPs and use that as a mandate for another independence referendum. Hmm. Run that past me again. Humza.
    If they have a majority that's it. It was good enough for Mrs Thatcher, remember.
    Holyrood wasn't even created when Thatcher was PM and she is no longer even alive.

    Instead as the UK SC confirmed if Unionists have a majority across the UK, then Westminster can block an indyref2 indefinitely
    Thank you for clarifying that Margaret Thatcher is no longer even alive.
    Even dead she haunts the dreams of both Labour and the Tories.

    Hard to think of another Prime Minister who exerted such an extraordinary and divisive stranglehold on British politics so long after death. Pitt and Peel, perhaps, but very few others.
    Winston Churchill?
    1 Churchill
    2 Thatcher
    3 Gladstone

    The most dominant PMs of all time in my view
    PItt, Peel, and Lloyd George might be on that lost too.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Taz said:

    Morons shouting during the minutes silence.

    Hopefully someone is now quietly beating them up
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,074

    This is a great response to a question I asked this evening while discussing this vexing situation - "what is it that Hamas were hoping to get from their actions?" eternal discord and grievance - horrifying but entirely plausible.

    • i) Preserve their power base amongst the people of Gaza and prevent interlopers superseding them as the supreme Gazan power
    • ii) Attempt to unify anti-Israeli forces outside Gaza under one banner (theirs)
    • iii) Attempt to disrupt the Israeli rapprochment with other countries, eg Saudi Arabia
    In short:
    • i) keep the power they have
    • ii) gain allies
    • iii) weaken the power of their enemy
    So far, unfortunately, it seems to be working

  • Northern_AlNorthern_Al Posts: 8,375
    HYUFD said:

    ydoethur said:

    HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    So the idea is they could lose a bunch of MPs and use that as a mandate for another independence referendum. Hmm. Run that past me again. Humza.
    If they have a majority that's it. It was good enough for Mrs Thatcher, remember.
    Holyrood wasn't even created when Thatcher was PM and she is no longer even alive.

    Instead as the UK SC confirmed if Unionists have a majority across the UK, then Westminster can block an indyref2 indefinitely
    Thank you for clarifying that Margaret Thatcher is no longer even alive.
    Even dead she haunts the dreams of both Labour and the Tories.

    Hard to think of another Prime Minister who exerted such an extraordinary and divisive stranglehold on British politics so long after death. Pitt and Peel, perhaps, but very few others.
    Winston Churchill?
    1 Churchill
    2 Thatcher
    3 Gladstone

    The most dominant PMs of all time in my view
    What, no Truss?
  • HYUFD said:

    Carnyx said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    So the idea is they could lose a bunch of MPs and use that as a mandate for another independence referendum. Hmm. Run that past me again. Humza.
    If they have a majority that's it. It was good enough for Mrs Thatcher, remember.
    Holyrood wasn't even created when Thatcher was PM and she is no longer even alive.

    Instead as the UK SC confirmed if Unionists have a majority across the UK, then Westminster can block an indyref2 indefinitely
    Thank you for clarifying that Margaret Thatcher is no longer even alive.
    Is @HYUFD about? Want to verify the status of Franco….
    Wasn't "General Franco Still Dead" a running gag on something like Saturday Night Live?

    And if Maggie is dead, should someone break it to the Conservative Party membership?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 34,663
    I think SA are going to upset the hosts tonight.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,376
    Those anthems made the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. Magnificent spectacle.

    Now for a few effing adverts.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,074
    @stodge, @Cicero, @DoubleCarpet

    As ever, thank you for your election-related coverage. You are unsung heroes.
  • moonshinemoonshine Posts: 5,747
    Maybe it’s been posted here already but I only just saw it on Jake Broe - video of Hamas knocking down the Gazan border wall last week, commands being shouted in Russian. Bit ominous.

    Meanwhile another interesting thought raised on Twitter for the bettors here. Namely Blinken as next president. I can’t even see him on betfair but depending on the next few months, it might not be the worst outside bet.
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,376
    Leon said:

    Taz said:

    Morons shouting during the minutes silence.

    Hopefully someone is now quietly beating them up
    Give them a good shoeing.
  • Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 689

    Leon said:

    A France-England semi will be much better for the tournament. France would have easily beaten Fiji; England could test them. France will be nervous and wary. Tho I still expect France to win

    This is especially so as the other semi will be a doddle for NZ

    France for the Cup

    Hey, I said it first! (hopefully have not put the kiss of death on it!) I've fancied France for WC2023 since before that first game.
    A lot of people said on the first weekend that the opening match would also be the closing match. That is now looking a strong likliehood. My prediction was the match just starting would be the final.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    edited October 2023
    Nations that have won the World Cup either with the Union Jack in their flags, or some element of it:

    All of them

    Nations that have won the World Cup, witthout this:

    None
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,677
    viewcode said:

    This is a great response to a question I asked this evening while discussing this vexing situation - "what is it that Hamas were hoping to get from their actions?" eternal discord and grievance - horrifying but entirely plausible.

    • i) Preserve their power base amongst the people of Gaza and prevent interlopers superseding them as the supreme Gazan power
    • ii) Attempt to unify anti-Israeli forces outside Gaza under one banner (theirs)
    • iii) Attempt to disrupt the Israeli rapprochment with other countries, eg Saudi Arabia
    In short:
    • i) keep the power they have
    • ii) gain allies
    • iii) weaken the power of their enemy
    So far, unfortunately, it seems to be working

    Excellent strategy and execution from Hamas.

    The only thing Gaza produces is people so that's the resource they exploit.
  • 9 p.m. IPSOS EXIT POLL

    PIS 36.8% - 200 seats
    KO 31.6% - 163 seats
    TD 13% - 55 seats
    Lewica 8.6% - 30 seats
    KON 6.2% - 12 seats
    BEZ 2.4% - 0 seats

    KO + TD + Lewica MAJORITY

    So let's see if that holds when the actual results come in - IIRC in Poland they are released in huge batches rather than a live count (which I always think feels slightly potentially more dodgy).

    If these were the results, there would be a change in government.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Polish_parliamentary_election
  • 9 p.m. IPSOS EXIT POLL

    PIS 36.8% - 200 seats
    KO 31.6% - 163 seats
    TD 13% - 55 seats
    Lewica 8.6% - 30 seats
    KON 6.2% - 12 seats
    BEZ 2.4% - 0 seats

    KO + TD + Lewica MAJORITY

    So let's see if that holds when the actual results come in - IIRC in Poland they are released in huge batches rather than a live count (which I always think feels slightly potentially more dodgy).

    If these were the results, there would be a change in government.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Polish_parliamentary_election

    Anyone know how reliable Polish polls are?
  • CookieCookie Posts: 13,792
    Wow. England will lose the semi by about 50 points.

    That said that's what we thought in tge final in 2007and in the end they managed to lose only by the width of Matthew Tait's boot.

    (Ah, that day was a very early date with my now wife. Oh you should have seen the way she moved around the pub that night. I admit my mind was only pqrtially on the game.)
  • I am mentally prepared for France to win the world cup this year.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,486
    Leon said:

    Nations that have won the World Cup either with the Union Jack in their flags, or some element of it:

    All of them

    Nations that have won the World Cup, witthout this:

    None

    South Africa didn’t win the World Cup before their flag changed so by the time they did the Union Jack had gone from their flag.
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,871
    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Jesus Christ

    Sensational sport

    Is any interntional sport as good as ths, at this level?
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    Leon said:

    Nations that have won the World Cup either with the Union Jack in their flags, or some element of it:

    All of them

    Nations that have won the World Cup, witthout this:

    None

    What part of South Africa's flag has an element of it? I mean, some of the colours maybe but those are pretty common.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 122,918

    9 p.m. IPSOS EXIT POLL

    PIS 36.8% - 200 seats
    KO 31.6% - 163 seats
    TD 13% - 55 seats
    Lewica 8.6% - 30 seats
    KON 6.2% - 12 seats
    BEZ 2.4% - 0 seats

    KO + TD + Lewica MAJORITY

    So let's see if that holds when the actual results come in - IIRC in Poland they are released in huge batches rather than a live count (which I always think feels slightly potentially more dodgy).

    If these were the results, there would be a change in government.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Polish_parliamentary_election

    True if they can agree a coalition, though Law and Justice would win most seats for a third successive election
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,153
    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    The biggest cost of cash is insurance; an insurer will typically price you as if you are cleaned out 3-4x a year.
  • This is different class to Eng vs Fiji game....
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,630
    edited October 2023
    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
  • DoubleCarpetDoubleCarpet Posts: 888
    edited October 2023

    9 p.m. IPSOS EXIT POLL

    PIS 36.8% - 200 seats
    KO 31.6% - 163 seats
    TD 13% - 55 seats
    Lewica 8.6% - 30 seats
    KON 6.2% - 12 seats
    BEZ 2.4% - 0 seats

    KO + TD + Lewica MAJORITY

    So let's see if that holds when the actual results come in - IIRC in Poland they are released in huge batches rather than a live count (which I always think feels slightly potentially more dodgy).

    If these were the results, there would be a change in government.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Polish_parliamentary_election

    Anyone know how reliable Polish polls are?
    No idea, but if Kellner's Law is in action as it so often is, the actual results will be better for the right and worse for the left.

    On the exits that looks like a 248-212 seat lead for the opposition.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,486
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Nations that have won the World Cup either with the Union Jack in their flags, or some element of it:

    All of them

    Nations that have won the World Cup, witthout this:

    None

    What part of South Africa's flag has an element of it? I mean, some of the colours maybe but those are pretty common.
    The old one did have a Union Jack as one of three flags in the middle white band until replaced by the “Reggae Party” as my SA friends call the replacement - with love not racism.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    Nations that have won the World Cup either with the Union Jack in their flags, or some element of it:

    All of them

    Nations that have won the World Cup, witthout this:

    None

    South Africa didn’t win the World Cup before their flag changed so by the time they did the Union Jack had gone from their flag.
    "Element of it"

    Part of the new SA flag is a conscious and rightful hommage to the Union Jack: the flag designer said this at the time
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,376
    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    Yes.

    Wife and I went for a walk from Latimers to Roker pier and back yesterday. Coffee shop we stopped at explicitly asked for cash. Not for some dumb conspiracy theory but simply due to the charges they incur.

    I paid by card as I don’t really carry cash now but I am starting to wonder if I should
  • Anybody believe these two packs have never seen an anabolic steroid.....
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    kle4 said:

    Leon said:

    Nations that have won the World Cup either with the Union Jack in their flags, or some element of it:

    All of them

    Nations that have won the World Cup, witthout this:

    None

    What part of South Africa's flag has an element of it? I mean, some of the colours maybe but those are pretty common.
    "Three of the flag's colours were taken from the flag of the South African Republic, itself derived from the flag of the Netherlands, as well as the Union Jack,"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_South_Africa
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 22,074
    edited October 2023
    Dura_Ace said:

    viewcode said:

    This is a great response to a question I asked this evening while discussing this vexing situation - "what is it that Hamas were hoping to get from their actions?" eternal discord and grievance - horrifying but entirely plausible.

    • i) Preserve their power base amongst the people of Gaza and prevent interlopers superseding them as the supreme Gazan power
    • ii) Attempt to unify anti-Israeli forces outside Gaza under one banner (theirs)
    • iii) Attempt to disrupt the Israeli rapprochment with other countries, eg Saudi Arabia
    In short:
    • i) keep the power they have
    • ii) gain allies
    • iii) weaken the power of their enemy
    So far, unfortunately, it seems to be working

    Excellent strategy and execution from Hamas.

    The only thing Gaza produces is people so that's the resource they exploit.
    Burning up people to achieve their goal. Not good. :(
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,355

    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    "Online ticketing system" - presumably this is some sort of website they are paying for, as opposed to simply the transaction.
  • Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    "Online ticketing system" - presumably this is some sort of website they are paying for, as opposed to simply the transaction.
    But even then the costs aren't that high.

    It simply doesn't pass the smell test for me.
  • boulayboulay Posts: 5,486
    Leon said:

    boulay said:

    Leon said:

    Nations that have won the World Cup either with the Union Jack in their flags, or some element of it:

    All of them

    Nations that have won the World Cup, witthout this:

    None

    South Africa didn’t win the World Cup before their flag changed so by the time they did the Union Jack had gone from their flag.
    "Element of it"

    Part of the new SA flag is a conscious and rightful hommage to the Union Jack: the flag designer said this at the time
    Yes, fair enough, I was thinking of “element” being more along the lines of having the Union Jack in the flag but then that would rule out England weirdly.

  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Fuck

    The Boks are good

    WHAT A MATCH
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,871

    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    which totally passes the smell test, to take your lowest figure 30p on debit cards.....you only need an average payment of 3.33. Even upping it to £5 would incurs a cost of £540
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,376

    This is different class to Eng vs Fiji game....

    Like the difference between two top premiership soccer teams playing each other and two mid table teams.

    They just had a close up of a Saffer player and the sweat was dripping off him. The intensity is amazing.
  • England will do well to keep the score below 100...
  • Anybody believe these two packs have never seen an anabolic steroid.....

    Believe me, some people _are_ naturally large and strong.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,991
    edited October 2023

    Anybody believe these two packs have never seen an anabolic steroid.....

    Believe me, some people _are_ naturally large and strong.
    Look at the traps....
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    which totally passes the smell test, to take your lowest figure 30p on debit cards.....you only need an average payment of 3.33. Even upping it to £5 would incurs a cost of £540
    But there are pricing models for high volume low value transactions so they don't get charged the amount they say.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,717
    And I thought earlier matches were exciting  …
    I support whichever team is behind
  • geoffw said:

    And I thought earlier matches were exciting  …
    I support whichever team is behind

    We can't be shouting for the French....that an instant dismissal to the sin bin of Conservative Home.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    Whoever wins this, wins the Cup

    France, for me
  • I am mentally prepared for France to win the world cup this year.

    Just as well, really
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083

    Anybody believe these two packs have never seen an anabolic steroid.....

    Maybe if its injected into their arsecheeks.
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,783
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    malcolmg said:

    HYUFD said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    On current polls they may achieve neither given the swing from SNP to Labour.

    Not that Sunak or Starmer will care less what Yousaf proposed and the SNP conference decided
    There is every chance they could be bigger than the rump of the Tory party left given current popularity.
    Actually on current Scotland only polls the Tories may even gain seats in Scotland as well as Labour as the SNP are down about 10% on 2019 and the Scottish Conservatives only down about 6%
    I'm interested in Alba (I realise those are words never before uttered by a human being).

    Do they stand anyway and take a couple of percent from the SNP, which could cost them a few seats if things are tight?
    I was chatting to a stats/polling person about that a few weeks ago and they said 'no'. Unless you're really talking about a handful of votes deciding the result.

    I didn't care enough about it to question their answer - so ymmv.
  • I haven't seen a charge down in an international for about 20 years.
  • LostPasswordLostPassword Posts: 18,355

    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    "Online ticketing system" - presumably this is some sort of website they are paying for, as opposed to simply the transaction.
    But even then the costs aren't that high.

    It simply doesn't pass the smell test for me.
    I think it's possible they've been done over and sold something they don't really need at an exorbitant cost. This happens in all sorts of areas, though is more prevalent with something like IT when a lot of the people buying it don't understand it.
  • Anybody believe these two packs have never seen an anabolic steroid.....

    Believe me, some people _are_ naturally large and strong.
    Look at the traps....
    I am, traps are quite easy to build in the gym
  • England will do well to keep the score below 100...

    They will go through the mincer, to be sure
  • Pagan2Pagan2 Posts: 9,871

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    which totally passes the smell test, to take your lowest figure 30p on debit cards.....you only need an average payment of 3.33. Even upping it to £5 would incurs a cost of £540
    But there are pricing models for high volume low value transactions so they don't get charged the amount they say.
    They stated if they sold 9k they only had 8k left after bank charges for cashless and online ticketing. If you think they are lying about it provide a source. Whereas they also state it would cost them 1.5% to deposit the cash which at 9k would cost £135. Using online ticketing and cashless payments therefore unless they are lying cost the an extra £865. If you think they are lying provide a source
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    The difference betweem this and America Football is ridiculous

    Admittedly this is the very peak of the sport, but still

    OMFGGGGGG
  • Leon said:

    Fuck

    The Boks are good

    WHAT A MATCH

    You can *never* write off the French
  • Fucking hell.

    5 quality tries in 25 mins.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,083
    There seem to be a large number of political alliance groupings in Poland. Like, to the point of making it ineffective, and needing a super alliance grouping too.
  • Leon said:

    Fuck

    The Boks are good

    WHAT A MATCH

    You can *never* write off the French
    Well, not until the full 80 minutes is up, anyway
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,783
    HYUFD said:

    SNP delegates have backed Humza Yousaf's plan to use the next general election result to push for a second independence referendum.

    An amended version of the strategy was voted through overwhelmingly at the party's annual conference in Aberdeen.

    It is based on winning a majority of Scottish seats, at least 29.

    This would provide a mandate to for another referendum, according to the proposals.

    Under the agreed strategy, if the SNP win the majority of seats in Scotland in the next general election, it will demand the powers to hold a referendum are transferred to the Scottish Parliament.

    Alternatively, the strategy said the party should consider using the 2026 Scottish Parliament election as a de facto referendum.


    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-67116489

    On current polls they may achieve neither given the swing from SNP to Labour.

    Not that Sunak or Starmer will care less what Yousaf proposed and the SNP conference decided
    We'll be almost halfway into a UK parliament by the next Holyrood election. If people aren't "feeling it" they might well swing back.
  • Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    "Online ticketing system" - presumably this is some sort of website they are paying for, as opposed to simply the transaction.
    But even then the costs aren't that high.

    It simply doesn't pass the smell test for me.
    I think it's possible they've been done over and sold something they don't really need at an exorbitant cost. This happens in all sorts of areas, though is more prevalent with something like IT when a lot of the people buying it don't understand it.
    Yup that seems plausible, the whole payment system is rapidly evolving, nowadays you don't need any hardware other than a smartphone.

    https://www.apple.com/uk/newsroom/2023/07/apple-introduces-tap-to-pay-on-iphone-in-the-uk/
  • Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    which totally passes the smell test, to take your lowest figure 30p on debit cards.....you only need an average payment of 3.33. Even upping it to £5 would incurs a cost of £540
    For higher volume, lower cost transactions its possible to get transaction charges down to 1p per transaction.

    Much cheaper than cash.
  • Leon said:

    The difference betweem this and America Football is ridiculous

    Admittedly this is the very peak of the sport, but still

    OMFGGGGGG

    I am not sure i have ever seen a game as good as this...
  • eekeek Posts: 28,368

    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    "Online ticketing system" - presumably this is some sort of website they are paying for, as opposed to simply the transaction.
    But even then the costs aren't that high.

    It simply doesn't pass the smell test for me.
    I think it's possible they've been done over and sold something they don't really need at an exorbitant cost. This happens in all sorts of areas, though is more prevalent with something like IT when a lot of the people buying it don't understand it.
    Yup that seems plausible, the whole payment system is rapidly evolving, nowadays you don't need any hardware other than a smartphone.

    https://www.apple.com/uk/newsroom/2023/07/apple-introduces-tap-to-pay-on-iphone-in-the-uk/
    is it still 30p for every debit card transaction - that adds up quick if say you are selling beers at £6 a time..
  • ohnotnowohnotnow Posts: 3,783
    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    which totally passes the smell test, to take your lowest figure 30p on debit cards.....you only need an average payment of 3.33. Even upping it to £5 would incurs a cost of £540
    But there are pricing models for high volume low value transactions so they don't get charged the amount they say.
    They stated if they sold 9k they only had 8k left after bank charges for cashless and online ticketing. If you think they are lying about it provide a source. Whereas they also state it would cost them 1.5% to deposit the cash which at 9k would cost £135. Using online ticketing and cashless payments therefore unless they are lying cost the an extra £865. If you think they are lying provide a source
    Maybe they've just been set up/advised badly? I have no idea - but it's possibly some cowboy has left them with a bad deal?
  • Six tries in 30 mins, I need a cigarette as I cannot cope.
  • Fucking hell.

    5 quality tries in 25 mins.

    6. Fans getting their money's worth tonight.
  • Leon said:

    The difference betweem this and America Football is ridiculous

    Admittedly this is the very peak of the sport, but still

    OMFGGGGGG

    I am not sure i have ever seen a game as good as this...
    French power versus South African flair!
  • TazTaz Posts: 14,376
    What a game this is. These players are all giving their all. It’s really really intense.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 81,991
    edited October 2023
    Taz said:

    What a game this is. These players are all giving their all. It’s really really intense.

    I feel warn out just watching it....how long to half time, not sure can make it.
  • Leon said:

    The difference betweem this and America Football is ridiculous

    Admittedly this is the very peak of the sport, but still

    OMFGGGGGG

    I am not sure i have ever seen a game as good as this...
    French power versus South African flair!
    Nah, it's the other way round.
  • eek said:

    Pagan2 said:

    Taz said:

    Cashless society is impacting the ability of charities and other groups to raise funds for good causes.

    https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/comment/article-12630377/JEFF-PRESTRIDGE-March-cashless-society-continues.html

    hmmm so two bits of that article...quotes incoming "yet a recent change in the classification of the Lions account by HSBC means any cash deposits or withdrawals attract a 1.5 per cent charge."

    and

    "What jars,' says Jim, 'is that the payment machines and the online ticketing system we use charge on a percentage of takings basis. So for our recent Beer Festival in August, we made a profit of £8,000 instead of £9,000."

    So on 9000 depositing cash would have cost 135 but using cashless systems cost a 1000. Aren't the proponents of cashless always telling us its so much cheaper for things to be cashless?

    It doesn't past the smell test.

    Cashless is much cheaper usually.

    Transaction charges on debit cards is something like 30p per transaction, 2% for Mastercard and Visa credit cards, and 4% for AMEX.

    (There are other transaction charging percentages but that's the usual ballpark.)
    "Online ticketing system" - presumably this is some sort of website they are paying for, as opposed to simply the transaction.
    But even then the costs aren't that high.

    It simply doesn't pass the smell test for me.
    I think it's possible they've been done over and sold something they don't really need at an exorbitant cost. This happens in all sorts of areas, though is more prevalent with something like IT when a lot of the people buying it don't understand it.
    Yup that seems plausible, the whole payment system is rapidly evolving, nowadays you don't need any hardware other than a smartphone.

    https://www.apple.com/uk/newsroom/2023/07/apple-introduces-tap-to-pay-on-iphone-in-the-uk/
    is it still 30p for every debit card transaction - that adds up quick if say you are selling beers at £6 a time..
    No, that's the general pricing structure, however when you sign up with a payment processing firm they ask a lot of questions and if you are a high volume, low value card transaction business you can get the charge down to single pennies per transaction.
  • LeonLeon Posts: 55,277
    i mean

    fuck
  • Penddu2Penddu2 Posts: 689
    Awesome...awesome...awesome...

    Running out of superlatives for this match
  • Six tries in 30 mins, I need a cigarette as I cannot cope.

    Don't, it's so bad for you.
  • Six tries in 30 mins, I need a cigarette as I cannot cope.

    Don't, it's so bad for you.
    I know, it's why I smoke cigars.
  • Are England allowed to concede the semi-final rather than go through it? I mean we've all had a nice time, and final four isn't bad, but probably leave it to the pros from here.
  • Are England allowed to concede the semi-final rather than go through it? I mean we've all had a nice time, and final four isn't bad, but probably leave it to the pros from here.

    Hahaha
  • Are England allowed to concede the semi-final rather than go through it? I mean we've all had a nice time, and final four isn't bad, but probably leave it to the pros from here.

    I'm hoping the winner of this match are so drained by this match that they are broken for next weekend's semi final and England smash them.
  • geoffwgeoffw Posts: 8,717
    Ils chantent:

    abreuve nos sillons !!!
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,632
    Interesting piece by Mark Pack on how the polls may have got it wrong for Labour.

    https://theweekinpolls.substack.com/p/what-should-worry-labour-in-the-polls
This discussion has been closed.