Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla · 6h NEW: Guardian & Observer journalists overwhelming vote in favour of strike action in protest at proposed sale of the Observer to Tortoise media.
Bet that transaction moves at the pace of a turtle.
Given that Jaguar have been losing money for two decades even as Land Rover did well, radical steps are required. Not sure this advert is helping, though.
Clarkson will be ammused at the nod to him on the number plate on that prototype. JAAAG....
What kind of idiotic director views that advert and thinks:
“This sums up what Jaguar is about.”
It smacks of an ad designed by a hip liberal metropolitan ad agency rooted in Shoreditch.
Which it probably is.
Maybe they had “discovered” a band called New Order and their little known video for a song called True Faith and thought, “Yeah, weird looking people in silly outfits doing strange things is going to be the look this year.”.
Jag has been shafted by the current owners, never been great cars but at least had an image that worked for a clientele. To break into a new market they will need to be either really well made (hmmm) or cheap.
Sadly they weren’t sold to one of the German giants who would have made them well and got a decent range together.
Oh it’s worse than that - the prices of the forthcoming Jaguar cars is £100,000+ and I don’t think the market for £100,000 ev cars is that great (or in reality exists at all)
The market for £100k EVs is currently a few hundred of the mad 1000bhp Teslas, sold mainly to American drag strip fans because it can beat McLarens over a quarter mile, and a few thousand Porsche Taycan Turbos, sold mainly to CEOs and driving enthusiasts.
That’s a blooming difficult segment to crack, unless they’re going to make it faster in a straight line than the Tesla and faster round a track than the Porsche.
Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla · 6h NEW: Guardian & Observer journalists overwhelming vote in favour of strike action in protest at proposed sale of the Observer to Tortoise media.
How do Tortoise have the money to buy the Observer? Or rather who is giving them money to do such a deal, when literally nobody reads their "slow news" approach. Even here, I don't think it ever gets linked to and we must be on the absolute bullseye of their target market.
I disagree with what the government is doing wrt IHT and farmers.
But the contrary view - that the exemption should be removed - is arguable. as we have seen on here. The problem is that Starmer is a cr@p salesman - he just cannot sell policies. If this was a Blair policy, then Blair, Mandelson, Campbell et al would all be on the TV explaining why this is a totally reasonable move and not selling anyone out, and how much they *love* the countryside and farmers.
But Starmer and his team just cannot do that. They are not salesmen. They need to be able to persuade the public that what they are doing is right, and not declare war on farmers.
Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla · 6h NEW: Guardian & Observer journalists overwhelming vote in favour of strike action in protest at proposed sale of the Observer to Tortoise media.
How do Tortoise have the money to buy the Observer? Or rather who is giving them money to do such a deal, when literally nobody reads their "slow news" approach. Even here, I don't think it ever gets linked to and we must be on the absolute bullseye of their target market.
Used to get linked a bit here during the late Corbyn years, Tortoise and Novara were the pet channels of the Jeremy fans who thought the Guardian was way too right-wing for their tastes.
Presumably the Observer is losing money hand over fist, as most of the separate Sundays now do, thanks to paying the likes of Ms Cadwalladr six-figure salaries for one piece per week? So the ‘purchase price’ is likely to be almost nothing, with some vague commitment to preserving most of the jobs. The only real IP is the name.
Their editor is James Harding, formerly of Times, and they appear to have some private funding having raised £500k from a Kickstarter six years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortoise_Media
The inflation rate, which measures price changes over time, hit 2.3% in the year to October, an increase from 1.7% in September. Annual gas and electricity bills rose by about £149 last month, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rl4rgdj12o
The inflation rate, which measures price changes over time, hit 2.3% in the year to October, an increase from 1.7% in September. Annual gas and electricity bills rose by about £149 last month, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rl4rgdj12o
Carole Cadwalladr @carolecadwalla · 6h NEW: Guardian & Observer journalists overwhelming vote in favour of strike action in protest at proposed sale of the Observer to Tortoise media.
How do Tortoise have the money to buy the Observer? Or rather who is giving them money to do such a deal, when literally nobody reads their "slow news" approach. Even here, I don't think it ever gets linked to and we must be on the absolute bullseye of their target market.
Used to get linked a bit here during the late Corbyn years, Tortoise and Novara were the pet channels of the Jeremy fans who thought the Guardian was way too right-wing for their tastes.
Presumably the Observer is losing money hand over fist, as most of the separate Sundays now do, thanks to paying the likes of Ms Cadwalladr six-figure salaries for one piece per week? So the ‘purchase price’ is likely to be almost nothing, with some vague commitment to preserving most of the jobs. The only real IP is the name.
Their editor is James Harding, formerly of Times, and they appear to have some private funding having raised £500k from a Kickstarter six years ago. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortoise_Media
I think the lawyers fees she will have incurred the Observer might have made her salary look like small change....
The inflation rate, which measures price changes over time, hit 2.3% in the year to October, an increase from 1.7% in September. Annual gas and electricity bills rose by about £149 last month, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rl4rgdj12o
ONS saying it was driven by the energy price cap hike.
Even with all the semi racist ranting, the most controversial thing in the subsequent thread:
‘JLR used to stand for reliability, quality, craftsmanship and superb engineering’
One of the twitter replies rather nailed it...
"I’d say the story has concluded. With you being the story and the story being over. Your cars have been shit for decades but at least they’re better than your ad campaign."
The inflation rate, which measures price changes over time, hit 2.3% in the year to October, an increase from 1.7% in September. Annual gas and electricity bills rose by about £149 last month, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rl4rgdj12o
ONS saying it was driven by the energy price cap hike.
Why did the energy cap rise? Have gas prices gone up?
Given that Jaguar have been losing money for two decades even as Land Rover did well, radical steps are required. Not sure this advert is helping, though.
I love my Jaguar XE, which I bought in 2017, but they've completely lost their way in the last few years.
There was a time they were competitive with BMWs, Mercedes and Audis, and I'd argue better.
Frankly if the Tories are looking to win back votes like mine (well probably not mine at this point but many people like me) they need to get off this protesting stuff and onto actual ideas for anyone under the age of 90.
They might be right on the farms thing - but this is an irrelevant issue to the voters in the centre ground.
I am getting strong Labour 2010-2019 vibes. Please don't go down that path.
I'm sorry the Tories aren't going to win the election with votes like yours. They need to win 6 points back from reform and 6-8 points from everyone else. Probably 2 points from the Lib Dems and 4-6 from Labour. They don't need to venture into the far left to get there broadening the party's appeal on the centre right is enough to do it. Sticking up for farmers is a good first step to show small c conservatives who voted Reform that the party does still care about them and their way of life.
I am not "far left" Max and you know it.
The fact that your attitude is that you don't want to try and win votes like mine, people who simply want a bit of action on student fees, building some houses and yes the I word, is disappointing.
I mean, the fact you didn’t vote (or consider voting) Tory in 2019, when they almost maximised their potential, does suggest you shouldn’t be first on the target list.
I didn't say they should target me first, just that if they want to build a coalition for the long term and win some younger voters, they could look at housing. Why would they not want to, it doesn't make sense.
I didn't consider voting Tory in 2019 because of the leader. To be honest I regret voting in that election at all - but as I've said many times I regret that vote. I would hope that can be acknowledged rather than being held up as some character mistake.
When did I say it was character mistake? You’re left of centre and not a Tory target, because if they got you they’d have 500 seats. Same (but opposite) reason Labour aren’t interested in me, but the LibDems are.
That’s neither a good nor a bad thing.
I've been held up quite a few times for voting for Corbyn in 2019 and it's something I freely acknowledge. I got it wrong, I accept that.
But it does grate a bit when people continuously use it as a justification for where they think I politically stand.
I genuinely, sincerely think I stand on the centre/centre left. And anyone who knows me in real life would agree with that. I really can't do much more to convince anyone of that other than what I've posted.
Ok, but that validates what I said. No Tory Party is going to target you. Why does that bother you?
Because he has this self imagine as a consensus builder but trying to get people to accept quite left wing positions by grinding away at it
As a progressive, woke, centrist dad... Oh my! I wasn't on the market for a Jaguar anyway, but that is proper cringe. I can't see this doing anything other than repelling some existing customers. There might be a demographic of young woke potential customers who will lap this up, but they'll have to be praised away from the (better) Audi's, BMWs etc and I'm not sure I see it.
Given that Jaguar have been losing money for two decades even as Land Rover did well, radical steps are required. Not sure this advert is helping, though.
I love my Jaguar XE, which I bought in 2017, but they've completely lost their way in the last few years.
There was a time they were competitive with BMWs, Mercedes and Audis, and I'd argue better.
I had a jag x type 53 reg. Wish I hadn't.
I've had no issues with mine. It's run superbly and I love it.
Given that Jaguar have been losing money for two decades even as Land Rover did well, radical steps are required. Not sure this advert is helping, though.
I love my Jaguar XE, which I bought in 2017, but they've completely lost their way in the last few years.
There was a time they were competitive with BMWs, Mercedes and Audis, and I'd argue better.
I had a jag x type 53 reg. Wish I hadn't.
My Dad has always loves Jags, and drives a 20 year old one.
The walnut and leather image is a rapidly ageing market, but the avante-garde campaign looks a step too far. It won't win a new market and is pretty certain to kill the old one.
The key surely is the quality, performance and price of the product that builds the brand, not the other way round.
I disagree with what the government is doing wrt IHT and farmers.
But the contrary view - that the exemption should be removed - is arguable. as we have seen on here. The problem is that Starmer is a cr@p salesman - he just cannot sell policies. If this was a Blair policy, then Blair, Mandelson, Campbell et al would all be on the TV explaining why this is a totally reasonable move and not selling anyone out, and how much they *love* the countryside and farmers.
But Starmer and his team just cannot do that. They are not salesmen. They need to be able to persuade the public that what they are doing is right, and not declare war on farmers.
There’s lots to unpick in the farming IHT issue but one is the nature and role of farming.
Part of the issue is the PR ‘brand’ of farming, which is positive - they produce our food. But beneath that is an industry in need of reform, as in many ways it has not served the country’s needs efficiently over a very long period of time. And by efficiency I mean maximising food production whilst minimising environmental disbenefits. And one of the issues there is the lack of new ideas as barriers to entry are high and peer pressure to conform also high. iHT might help a smidge with that.
In many ways the popular view of farming is very outdated. Farmers are really land managers responding to markets. And they have fended off regulation by agreeing to voluntary schemes, which are light touch if costly and process heavy, and which they moan about. The Red tape. But by agreeing to red tape it has basically exempted them from proper application of polluter pays. Farming is about growing food. Land management is about maximising the value of assets, be it through producing food, green power, recreation or development. And that is what they are now.
Many farmers are not wealthy, at least cash wealthy. Their income varies. There is uncertainty. But this can be offset by joining environmental schemes. Some are very wealthy and as with all walks of life the tendency has been for the wealthier to get bigger. Land is an asset, and the asset accumulators have moved in, big style. The Dysons. A farmer I know on the edge of a county town made many millions from selling land for development. He immediately started buying land in Wales to offset capital gains.
I tend to agree with the Govt that most smaller farmers who prepare properly will be able to avoid IHT. But to some extent so will the larger ones in time because they will develop accountancy dodges. What does rankle in all this is the way the NFU is treated so much more sympathetically than any other representative Union. A more recidivist and backward looking organisation it would be hard to find.
On a different tax topic, whilst I am in principle in favour of charging VAT on school fees, I just think Labour should have made state schools better in the first place.
Generally you should tax things with a negative external outcome (ie a cost to society). Education is not one of those
Frankly if the Tories are looking to win back votes like mine (well probably not mine at this point but many people like me) they need to get off this protesting stuff and onto actual ideas for anyone under the age of 90.
They might be right on the farms thing - but this is an irrelevant issue to the voters in the centre ground.
I am getting strong Labour 2010-2019 vibes. Please don't go down that path.
I'm sorry the Tories aren't going to win the election with votes like yours. They need to win 6 points back from reform and 6-8 points from everyone else. Probably 2 points from the Lib Dems and 4-6 from Labour. They don't need to venture into the far left to get there broadening the party's appeal on the centre right is enough to do it. Sticking up for farmers is a good first step to show small c conservatives who voted Reform that the party does still care about them and their way of life.
I am not "far left" Max and you know it.
The fact that your attitude is that you don't want to try and win votes like mine, people who simply want a bit of action on student fees, building some houses and yes the I word, is disappointing.
I mean, the fact you didn’t vote (or consider voting) Tory in 2019, when they almost maximised their potential, does suggest you shouldn’t be first on the target list.
I didn't say they should target me first, just that if they want to build a coalition for the long term and win some younger voters, they could look at housing. Why would they not want to, it doesn't make sense.
I didn't consider voting Tory in 2019 because of the leader. To be honest I regret voting in that election at all - but as I've said many times I regret that vote. I would hope that can be acknowledged rather than being held up as some character mistake.
When did I say it was character mistake? You’re left of centre and not a Tory target, because if they got you they’d have 500 seats. Same (but opposite) reason Labour aren’t interested in me, but the LibDems are.
That’s neither a good nor a bad thing.
I've been held up quite a few times for voting for Corbyn in 2019 and it's something I freely acknowledge. I got it wrong, I accept that.
But it does grate a bit when people continuously use it as a justification for where they think I politically stand.
I genuinely, sincerely think I stand on the centre/centre left. And anyone who knows me in real life would agree with that. I really can't do much more to convince anyone of that other than what I've posted.
Ok, but that validates what I said. No Tory Party is going to target you. Why does that bother you?
One of the sage election experts invited to talk about the Irish election on radio recently was talking about how Irish voters liked to be asked for their vote. Now, in the Irish context, where the constitution ensures that there's at least one TD for every 30,000 people, they mean this literally. The voters want to be asked, personally, by the candidates for their vote. And they often will be.
Even in Britain, though, people will like to think that the parties are trying to convince them. Even someone like me who has few qualms about adopting the far-left label (except insofar as people will ascribe views to me that I don't hold on that basis), would like to think that a Conservative party leader had aspirations to reach out and lead the whole country, and was at least willing to talk to people with views like mine, rather than to dismiss them out of hand. I want to feel as though a Conservative party leader is asking for my vote, even if my [hopefully polite] refusal is guaranteed. It's a sign to me that they feel we are both part of the same society (albeit I've now left and live in Ireland, but the trendy approach is to talk about how Britain and Ireland share these islands, so it's only a small stretch).
It's one of the things that I find provoking about HYUFD's approach. He is very quick to dismiss out of hand the views of people who deviate one iota from the true path of a Tory. That's not the sort of politics I want.
I agree. I’m a little to the centre ground of you but we should be one nation not two.
The left are coming over as extremely "nasty" in their anti-farm comments.
Well, I'm not of the left, but I'm generally sceptical of giving any industry special treatment. And I'm especially sceptical when the special treatment is abused by other groups of people to avoid taxes.
Am I coming over as nasty?
I have no objection to farmers. They are carrying out economic activity, just like shoemakers, bakers, shopkeepers and insurance entrepreneurs.
But I also struggle to see why they should get special treatment.
Which is why I'd suggest replacing inheritance tax with a small annual gross assets levy. You can pass whatever you like onto your children, free of tax, but for people with assets of more than £1m, you need to make an annual payment 0.1% or 0.2% on the excess.
And this would be payable by anyone owning assets in the UK, not just by UK taxpayers. (I.e. tax the asset, not just resident taxpayers.)
It would probably raise almost exactly the same as IHT. It would avoid massive one-off payments. It wouldn't treat different family run businesses differently depending on the industry they were in.
And it wouldn't distort the market by allowing investment managers to buy up farmland solely for the purpose of avoiding IHT.
I think the difference is that farmers put food on our tables and often it's a pretty thankless andow margin industry. Isn't there a case to be made that having a proper food security reserve is worth a few tax breaks?
Does it have the effect though?
Or does the tax break encourage family farmers to sell to Mr Investment Manager who wants to dodge tax?
The problem is that farms - and other family owned businesses - are in an unusual situation. For them to exist they have to have assets which have a very high paper value - land, machinery, factories etc - but the profit margins are often extremely small. This means that treating them in the same way as other inheritences will almost certainly lead to them being put out of business. Now that may not matter to some people. But I do think that as a nation we do far better having large numbers of family owned businesses rather than a few hundred multinationals owning and running everything. If you want all the family businesses to cease to exist - or at least don't care - then I can follow your thinking on this. But if you bellieve that a diverse range of small businesses and entrepreneurship is something to be valued then you ned to find another way to deal with the genuine issues of investment tax avoidance without hammering the real businessmen - whether they are farmers or boot makers.
In 2023 the average ROCE for farms was 0.5%
`
Don't forget though that the tax break will have had the effect of pushing the ROCE down, because it will have pushed the value of land up.
Surely the solution here is the @Malmesbury compromise: i.e. the IHT break exists so long as you don't sell the farm. If you do, then you need to pay it back.
Yep that is exactly the way to do it. Trouble is neither Labour nor the supporters of the tax on here are willing to consider it. They would rather pretend it isn't a problem and all the farmers are either vastly rich or too poor to qualify.
Does it roll over as a liability?
You can imagine in, say, 3 generations, someone who hates farming but can’t sell because they would owe a massive amount of IHT that would destroy all their capital base.
WRT business property relief, you do get organisations like St. James Place, marketing investments that attract it, and which ought not. The people making those investments play no role, working in the business.
OTOH, the estates of people who actually work in SME’s ought not to be hit by the IHT charge, as that’s just an incentive to sell out to a big corporation.
(Amusingly, my former colleagues knew St James's Place *extremely* well.)
Comments
That’s a blooming difficult segment to crack, unless they’re going to make it faster in a straight line than the Tesla and faster round a track than the Porsche.
But the contrary view - that the exemption should be removed - is arguable. as we have seen on here. The problem is that Starmer is a cr@p salesman - he just cannot sell policies. If this was a Blair policy, then Blair, Mandelson, Campbell et al would all be on the TV explaining why this is a totally reasonable move and not selling anyone out, and how much they *love* the countryside and farmers.
But Starmer and his team just cannot do that. They are not salesmen. They need to be able to persuade the public that what they are doing is right, and not declare war on farmers.
That Jaguar advert is something.
Presumably the Observer is losing money hand over fist, as most of the separate Sundays now do, thanks to paying the likes of Ms Cadwalladr six-figure salaries for one piece per week? So the ‘purchase price’ is likely to be almost nothing, with some vague commitment to preserving most of the jobs. The only real IP is the name.
Their editor is James Harding, formerly of Times, and they appear to have some private funding having raised £500k from a Kickstarter six years ago.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tortoise_Media
The inflation rate, which measures price changes over time, hit 2.3% in the year to October, an increase from 1.7% in September. Annual gas and electricity bills rose by about £149 last month,
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c8rl4rgdj12o
‘JLR used to stand for reliability, quality, craftsmanship and superb engineering’
"I’d say the story has concluded. With you being the story and the story being over. Your cars have been shit for decades but at least they’re better than your ad campaign."
x type 53 reg. Wish I hadn't.
NEW THREAD
The walnut and leather image is a rapidly ageing market, but the avante-garde campaign looks a step too far. It won't win a new market and is pretty certain to kill the old one.
The key surely is the quality, performance and price of the product that builds the brand, not the other way round.
Part of the issue is the PR ‘brand’ of farming, which is positive - they produce our food. But beneath that is an industry in need of reform, as in many ways it has not served the country’s needs efficiently over a very long period of time. And by efficiency I mean maximising food production whilst minimising environmental disbenefits. And one of the issues there is the lack of new ideas as barriers to entry are high and peer pressure to conform also high. iHT might help a smidge with that.
In many ways the popular view of farming is very outdated. Farmers are really land managers responding to markets. And they have fended off regulation by agreeing to voluntary schemes, which are light touch if costly and process heavy, and which they moan about. The Red tape. But by agreeing to red tape it has basically exempted them from proper application of polluter pays. Farming is about growing food. Land management is about maximising the value of assets, be it through producing food, green power, recreation or development. And that is what they are now.
Many farmers are not wealthy, at least cash wealthy. Their income varies. There is uncertainty. But this can be offset by joining environmental schemes. Some are very wealthy and as with all walks of life the tendency has been for the wealthier to get bigger. Land is an asset, and the asset accumulators have moved in, big style. The Dysons. A farmer I know on the edge of a county town made many millions from selling land for development. He immediately started buying land in Wales to offset capital gains.
I tend to agree with the Govt that most smaller farmers who prepare properly will be able to avoid IHT. But to some extent so will the larger ones in time because they will develop accountancy dodges. What does rankle in all this is the way the NFU is treated so much more sympathetically than any other representative Union. A more recidivist and backward looking organisation it would be hard to find.
You can imagine in, say, 3 generations, someone who hates farming but can’t sell because they would owe a massive amount of IHT that would destroy all their capital base.