Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Early voting begins for the May 22nd Euros and for some the

13»

Comments

  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    edited May 2014

    Tim_B said:

    Tim_B said:



    Not if you set it up correctly - the operators and trackco have a joint agreement such that trackco revenues are driven solely by traffic on their track, so that if they're late with updates etc they lose revenue. You'd have to define traffic - number of trains or number of cars, freight or passenger etc. Also journey times, late departure or arrival would factor in.

    The US model is essentially that - the freight companies own the track and the passenger train outfits pay to use them.

    It really is smple - honestly!

    And that is what is specifically forbidden under 91/440. The problem with your model is that with freight companies owning the track they give priority to the movement of freight and that makes passenger transport a very poor relation. The EU model was specifically designed to ensure that many different operators could run trains across the same track with equal priority given to each.
    OK, so ignore my "The US model" sentence and it works just fine, right? It was an illustration only as to how it can work.
    Sorry that wasn't meant as a criticism of the US model specifically only an explanation of what is and is not allowed under the EU directive. I am sure that with more controls the US model could work fine in the UK but we are simply not allowed to implement it.
    My point in saying ignore the US model was that the operators would have equal access. Thus it work work fine, right?

    Or, be like the French and ignore the inconvenient. :-)
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    surbiton said:

    Greens ahead of the yellows - the 5th party !

    It looks like they've officially joined 'Others'
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    Confirmed from the horses mouth

    YouGov Sunday Times Euros poll and assorted other goodies

    UKIP 29, Lab 28, Con 22, Greens 8, LD 7

    Twice as many voters think UKIP has the best immigration policy as support Tory plans. Only 18% think Farage should have stood in Newark; 54% of UKIP supporters say he did the right thing.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,682
    Tim_B said:

    Tim_B said:

    Tim_B said:



    Not if you set it up correctly - the operators and trackco have a joint agreement such that trackco revenues are driven solely by traffic on their track, so that if they're late with updates etc they lose revenue. You'd have to define traffic - number of trains or number of cars, freight or passenger etc. Also journey times, late departure or arrival would factor in.

    The US model is essentially that - the freight companies own the track and the passenger train outfits pay to use them.

    It really is smple - honestly!

    And that is what is specifically forbidden under 91/440. The problem with your model is that with freight companies owning the track they give priority to the movement of freight and that makes passenger transport a very poor relation. The EU model was specifically designed to ensure that many different operators could run trains across the same track with equal priority given to each.
    OK, so ignore my "The US model" sentence and it works just fine, right? It was an illustration only as to how it can work.
    Sorry that wasn't meant as a criticism of the US model specifically only an explanation of what is and is not allowed under the EU directive. I am sure that with more controls the US model could work fine in the UK but we are simply not allowed to implement it.
    My point in saying ignore the US model was that the operators would have equal access. Thus it work work fine, right?
    I agree with you. Unfortunately the EU do not. They seem to believe that it is necessary to have legally binding separation of infrastructure and operators to ensure a level playing field.
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    Tim_B said:

    Tim_B said:



    Not if you set it up correctly - the operators and trackco have a joint agreement such that trackco revenues are driven solely by traffic on their track, so that if they're late with updates etc they lose revenue. You'd have to define traffic - number of trains or number of cars, freight or passenger etc. Also journey times, late departure or arrival would factor in.

    The US model is essentially that - the freight companies own the track and the passenger train outfits pay to use them.

    It really is smple - honestly!

    And that is what is specifically forbidden under 91/440. The problem with your model is that with freight companies owning the track they give priority to the movement of freight and that makes passenger transport a very poor relation. The EU model was specifically designed to ensure that many different operators could run trains across the same track with equal priority given to each.
    OK, so ignore my "The US model" sentence and it works just fine, right? It was an illustration only as to how it can work.
    Sorry that wasn't meant as a criticism of the US model specifically only an explanation of what is and is not allowed under the EU directive. I am sure that with more controls the US model could work fine in the UK but we are simply not allowed to implement it.
    My point in saying ignore the US model was that the operators would have equal access. Thus it work work fine, right?
    I agree with you. Unfortunately the EU do not. They seem to believe that it is necessary to have legally binding separation of infrastructure and operators to ensure a level playing field.

    You have an independent trackco, and several operating companies, with no cross ownership, that do business with it. Is that not separation of infrastructure and operators?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Someone reported a 3% lead earlier but in fact it's 1%. I don't know where the crap information comes from, don't people double-check. (Not referring to anyone on here).
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,457
    Ninoinoz said:

    dr_spyn said:

    dr_spyn said:

    BR disaster under public ownership. Huge numbers of steam engines ordered from 1948 - most with lives of less than 20 years. Botched dieselisation programme - too many unproven designs ordered - scrapped with lives of less than 15 years. fragmented modernisation via electricfication rolling programme might have been better. Strikes, loss of freight. too much political control and too timid managements? progress under privatisation patchy - HSTs and carriages replaced by uncomfortable, cramped Voyagers. as for the bouncy castles...

    Warships - Scottish Region and Western Region Warships, Hymeks, Westerns.

    Add on farce with the Class 31 all 263 had to be re-engined. Class 28 Co-Bo. Class 40s, Class 44-45-46. Class 14, 15, 16 as well as 17 unfit for any purpose.
    It was a hideous waste of money. Too many classes ordered sometimes just because a region wanted to do something different: the western region's short-lived diesel-hydraulics being a classic case. Not invented here syndrome writ large.
    There may have been a case for diesel-hydraulics in the western region because of its hilly terrain.

    They were unreliable because the firms that built them were used to steam technology and not the higher tolerances needed for hydraulics.

    I think we're being too harsh on BR. Dieselisation was done precipitously to avoid duplicating everything for both diesel and steam. In fact, I wonder how many of farces mentioned here were due to 'diesels' requiring boilers to provide steam to heat old carriages. I notice there's usually a diesel banking so called steam trains to provide heat and light to the modern carriages.
    You have a point. I was told by an old hand that there were some new diesel locomotives in the 1960s that were spending long periods out of traffic, all based at one depot. After a few months they were moved to a different shed (Toton?), where magically serviceability increased.

    Firstly, the men liked the diesels, whereas in the old depot they had been disliked.
    Secondly, the depot had a specialist diesel shed. Diesel engines didn't get on with the smoke and steam from steam engines when they were maintained in the same shed.

    I believe the banking diesel on many steam tours is mainly to provide backup motive power. If a steam train breaks down, it causes chaos for scheduled traffic whilst a rescue loco is sent. With a diesel at the back, most of the time the train can be propelled to a siding or station to get it out of the way. ISTR that some coaches have generators in to provide electrics, often in the 'support' coach. But IANAE.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    edited May 2014
    AndyJS said:

    Someone reported a 3% lead earlier but in fact it's 1%. I don't know where the crap information comes from, don't people double-check. (Not referring to anyone on here).

    Usually they get it from zooming in onto the front pages, and that makes the image blurry, so they end up guessing/assuming.

    Is why I wait until it's on the Sunday Times website
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    Confirmed from the horses mouth

    YouGov Sunday Times Euros poll and assorted other goodies

    UKIP 29, Lab 28, Con 22, Greens 8, LD 7

    Twice as many voters think UKIP has the best immigration policy as support Tory plans. Only 18% think Farage should have stood in Newark; 54% of UKIP supporters say he did the right thing.

    So the "Farage frit" attack failed too. It's almost like our professional politicians and opinion formers are 3rd raters with no identifiable skills.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    From the Sunday Times

    Tory high command believes the focus on extremist candidates is having an effect. Its private polling shows that some voters have reached “hesitation point” over backing UKIP.
  • Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 32,682
    Tim_B said:



    You have an independent trackco, and several operating companies, with no cross ownership, that do business with it. Is that not separation of infrastructure and operators?

    Sorry I thought you said that the freight operators also owned the infrastructure...

    "The US model is essentially that - the freight companies own the track and the passenger train outfits pay to use them."

    That is what would not be allowed. If that is not the case then yes you are correct.

  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    This average of polls makes it neck and neck for the Euros.If this is about right the result will depend on the effectiveness of the campaign,both on the ground and in the air.

    electionista ‏@electionista 2h
    UK - #EP2014 polls avg.:

    LAB 29.7%
    UKIP 29.4%
    CON 21.7%
    LDEM 8.4%
    GRN 5.8%

    '09 result:

    CON 27.7%
    UKIP 16.5%
    LAB 15.7%
    LDEM 13.7%
    GRN 8.6%
    Expand
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    Ninoinoz said:

    dr_spyn said:

    BR disaster under public ownership. Huge numbers of steam engines ordered from 1948 - most with lives of less than 20 years. Botched dieselisation programme - too many unproven designs ordered - scrapped with lives of less than 15 years. fragmented modernisation via electricfication rolling programme might have been better. Strikes, loss of freight. too much political control and too timid managements? progress under privatisation patchy - HSTs and carriages replaced by uncomfortable, cramped Voyagers. as for the bouncy castles...
    Warships - Scottish Region and Western Region Warships, Hymeks, Westerns.

    Add on farce with the Class 31 all 263 had to be re-engined. Class 28 Co-Bo. Class 40s, Class 44-45-46. Class 14, 15, 16 as well as 17 unfit for any purpose.
    It was a hideous waste of money. Too many classes ordered sometimes just because a region wanted to do something different: the western region's short-lived diesel-hydraulics being a classic case. Not invented here syndrome writ large.
    There may have been a case for diesel-hydraulics in the western region because of its hilly terrain.

    They were unreliable because the firms that built them were used to steam technology and not the higher tolerances needed for hydraulics.

    You have a point. I was told by an old hand that there were some new diesel locomotives in the 1960s that were spending long periods out of traffic, all based at one depot. After a few months they were moved to a different shed (Toton?), where magically serviceability increased.

    Firstly, the men liked the diesels, whereas in the old depot they had been disliked.
    Secondly, the depot had a specialist diesel shed. Diesel engines didn't get on with the smoke and steam from steam engines when they were maintained in the same shed.

    I believe the banking diesel on many steam tours is mainly to provide backup motive power. If a steam train breaks down, it causes chaos for scheduled traffic whilst a rescue loco is sent. With a diesel at the back, most of the time the train can be propelled to a siding or station to get it out of the way. ISTR that some coaches have generators in to provide electrics, often in the 'support' coach. But IANAE.

    I do not pretend to be any kind of expert, but when I used to go from near Blackpool to Manchester with my mother in the late 50s, there was one steam engine on the front (I used to have my Ian Allen trainspotters books and would underline all I used to see) and that was it. We had steam heating and electric lights with cute shades on the tables.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Too many tweets. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27272907 So have the fruitcakes taken over the party?
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    From the Sunday Times

    Tory high command believes the focus on extremist candidates is having an effect. Its private polling shows that some voters have reached “hesitation point” over backing UKIP.

    Is The Times a credible source?

    "Its unbalanced [anti-UKIP] campaign reminds me of its botched attempt to ruin Lord Ashcroft more than a decade ago, which resulted in Murdoch eventually hoisting the white flag.

    An understandably irate Nigel Farage has accused The Times of acting as the Establishment's paper. Actually the charge against it is graver than that. It stands accused of being the lackey of the party in power."

    http://standpointmag.co.uk/open-season-may-14-the-time-nigel-farage-stephen-glover-rupert-murdoch
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2014
    Matthew Parris gets worried about UKIP in his weekly column (Times paywall):

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4079835.ece
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669

    Tim_B said:



    You have an independent trackco, and several operating companies, with no cross ownership, that do business with it. Is that not separation of infrastructure and operators?

    Sorry I thought you said that the freight operators also owned the infrastructure...

    "The US model is essentially that - the freight companies own the track and the passenger train outfits pay to use them."

    That is what would not be allowed. If that is not the case then yes you are correct.

    We're obviously thinking along the same lines :-)

    The point I was trying - and obviously failing miserably - to make was that having an operator pay the track owner is not difficult. I didn't mean to say that the freight companies should own UK track.

    In the US there is very little passenger traffic compared to freight which I suspect is not the case in the UK.
  • Eh_ehm_a_ehEh_ehm_a_eh Posts: 552
    SeanT said:

    I see the Sunday Herald has come out for YES.

    In other news, the Sunday Herald has a circulation of... 24,000. That's not its circulation in Dundee. That is its total circulation.

    The tininess of Scottish newspapers is startling.

    It's circulation should jump a bit from now on.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    The Sunday Times have a quiz asking how UKIP are you, I took the test and it said I'm

    U-blip. This reactionary madness can’t last much longer. You oppose UKIP on every front.
  • volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    Shame there is no match bet available for 4th place in the Euros between Greens and yellows.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746

    Shame there is no match bet available for 4th place in the Euros between Greens and yellows.

    Doesn't the LD seats bet work as a proxy? If the Greens do well, the LDs must surely do badly?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    In the Sunday Times, another reason for Scotland to vote no.

    VOTING for Scottish independence would destabilise Northern Ireland’s political process, former Ulster Unionist leader Lord Trimble has warned.

    The ex-Northern Ireland first minister said a Yes vote in September may also lead to increased violence, although he thinks mainstream republicans would see it as a reason to pursue change through the democratic process.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    From The Sunday Times

    A UKIP MEP, Roger Helmer, who defected from the Tories in 2012, has told friends that he is being lined up to fight the Newark by-election on June 5.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    From The Sunday Times

    A UKIP MEP, Roger Helmer, who defected from the Tories in 2012, has told friends that he is being lined up to fight the Newark by-election on June 5.

    Thats news to me, but probably correct. UKIP need a big hitter there.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2014
    Just occurred to me (rather belatedly) what a problem the Westminster parties have at the moment, in that they're having to fight on two fronts. If they could concentrate all their efforts on fighting either Salmond or Farage they might have been able to get somewhere. But having to contend with both of them at the same time is proving a bit difficult.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    From the Sunday Times

    POLICE will patrol polling stations in cities with large Asian communities during this month’s local elections in an effort to deter voting fraud.

    Officers will be stationed at sites in towns and cities identified by the Electoral Commission as being vulnerable to abuse. In a report earlier this year, the watchdog identified 16 “higher-risk” areas including Birmingham, Bradford, Burnley, Derby, Slough, Peterborough, and Tower Hamlets in east London.
  • Eh_ehm_a_ehEh_ehm_a_eh Posts: 552

    In the Sunday Times, another reason for Scotland to vote no.

    VOTING for Scottish independence would destabilise Northern Ireland’s political process, former Ulster Unionist leader Lord Trimble has warned.

    The ex-Northern Ireland first minister said a Yes vote in September may also lead to increased violence, although he thinks mainstream republicans would see it as a reason to pursue change through the democratic process.

    Scots will have so much blood on their hands if they vote yes.

    Baron Trimble follows Baron cataclysmic Reid, and Justine all the world's poor babies will die Greening.

    Who knew such a shtty little place full of torn faced, ginger benefit scroungers, holds the fate of the entire planet in it's hands
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    edited May 2014

    Confirmed from the horses mouth

    YouGov Sunday Times Euros poll and assorted other goodies

    UKIP 29, Lab 28, Con 22, Greens 8, LD 7

    Twice as many voters think UKIP has the best immigration policy as support Tory plans. Only 18% think Farage should have stood in Newark; 54% of UKIP supporters say he did the right thing.

    YouGov UNS

    UKIP 25 (+12)
    Lab 24 (+11)
    Con 16 (-10)
    Green 2 (nc)
    LD 0 (-11)
    SNP 2 (nc)
    Plaid 1 (nc)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    Confirmed - Sun on Sunday also has a Euros poll and Westminster VI poll by YouGov

    Euros Poll

    Nigel Farage's party is on 29%, ahead of Labour on 26%, the Conservatives on 23% and Liberal Democrats on 10%.

    Westminster VI Poll

    For the 2015 contest Labour has a three-point lead on 36% over the Conservatives on 33%, with Ukip on 15% ahead of the Lib Dems on 10%.

    http://news.uk.msn.com/ukip-ahead-in-euro-election-poll
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737

    Confirmed - Sun on Sunday also has a Euros poll and Westminster VI poll by YouGov

    Euros Poll

    Nigel Farage's party is on 29%, ahead of Labour on 26%, the Conservatives on 23% and Liberal Democrats on 10%.

    Westminster VI Poll

    For the 2015 contest Labour has a three-point lead on 36% over the Conservatives on 33%, with Ukip on 15% ahead of the Lib Dems on 10%.

    http://news.uk.msn.com/ukip-ahead-in-euro-election-poll

    Sun YouGov UNS

    UKIP 23 (-10)
    Lab 22 (+9)
    Con 17 (-9)
    LD 3 (-8)
    Grn* 2 (nc)
    SNP 2 (nc)
    Plaid 1 (nc)

    *estimate, no Green figure given
  • RodCrosbyRodCrosby Posts: 7,737
    UKIP 23 (+10), of course...

  • JohnLoonyJohnLoony Posts: 1,790
    "for some the ballot form will be very confusing"

    For whom?
    For stupid people who can't be bothered to pay attention.

    What concerns me most about that ballot paper is the design, the size, and the empty spaces. The whole thing could be much more compact. The names of the individual candidates within each list should be given in a separate list (displayed prominently), with only the names of the parties themselves on the ballot paper.
  • asjohnstoneasjohnstone Posts: 1,276


    Who knew such a shtty little place full of torn faced, ginger benefit scroungers, holds the fate of the entire planet in it's hands

    Seriously, this kind of post is acceptable to the moderators ?
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395


    Who knew such a shtty little place full of torn faced, ginger benefit scroungers, holds the fate of the entire planet in it's hands

    Seriously, this kind of post is acceptable to the moderators ?
    Yes, it wouldn't have been acceptable if a similar type of thing had been directed at black or Jewish people for example.
  • sarissasarissa Posts: 2,000

    In the Sunday Times, another reason for Scotland to vote no.

    VOTING for Scottish independence would destabilise Northern Ireland’s political process, former Ulster Unionist leader Lord Trimble has warned.

    The ex-Northern Ireland first minister said a Yes vote in September may also lead to increased violence, although he thinks mainstream republicans would see it as a reason to pursue change through the democratic process.

    Clarification from Lord Trimble on “Good Morning Scotland”, 3 May 2014 (31m 30s):

    “I want to correct what you said… [the website] reported me as saying that would threaten the peace process. I did not say that, that is not my view.

    Actually, a Yes vote in Scotland would reinforce the argument against violence, because it’s a demonstration of how you can achieve major change through the political democratic process.”
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,507
    edited May 2014
    Tory candidate quits over homophobic and anti-Islamic tweets

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27272907

    Too many tweets make a ....
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,723
    Euros polls give further indication that UKIP may have peaked about a week ago.

    I think Lab has an excellent chance of winning the Euros.

    I also think Con is worth a bet for the Euros at around 40-1 - if UKIP slips back and Con is only 3% behind Lab nationally then they must have a better than 40-1 chance.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    Tory candidate quits over homophobic and anti-Islamic tweets

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-27272907

    Too many tweets make a ....

    Maybe he'll gift the seat to UKIP, if they're standing in that ward.
  • fitalassfitalass Posts: 4,320
    edited May 2014
    Will Labour and UKIP protest voters turn out in enough numbers to match their current polling figures? Fields full of rapeseed in full bloom surrounding us isn't half playing havoc with my asthma right now.
    MikeL said:

    Euros polls give further indication that UKIP may have peaked about a week ago.

    I think Lab has an excellent chance of winning the Euros.

    I also think Con is worth a bet for the Euros at around 40-1 - if UKIP slips back and Con is only 3% behind Lab nationally then they must have a better than 40-1 chance.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited May 2014
    I think the two polls putting UKIP on 38% and 36% were a bit frothy and don't reflect what will actually happen on election day. 25-30% is more realistic.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,457
    Tim_B said:


    I do not pretend to be any kind of expert, but when I used to go from near Blackpool to Manchester with my mother in the late 50s, there was one steam engine on the front (I used to have my Ian Allen trainspotters books and would underline all I used to see) and that was it. We had steam heating and electric lights with cute shades on the tables.

    I didn't know the answer to this, so I looked it up:

    "At this time, lighting was powered by batteries which were charged by a dynamo underneath each carriage when the train was in motion, and buffet cars would use bottled gas for cooking and water heating."

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_end_power

    I guess that could provide enough juice for lighting, but nowhere near enough for heating.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,704
    Reading that ballot paper carefully ......if Richard Howitt isn't top of the Labour list, I'll not be voting Labour.
  • timmotimmo Posts: 1,469
    stodge said:

    timmo said:


    I can't see LDs holding onto Kingston...there are too many split wards already and some very close battles which I think will favour the Tories.
    Sutton will stay LD unless there is a total breakdown of the LD vote in the northern wards where labour could win 5-8 seats from nothing...
    If that happens then Sutton could go NOC....LDs have given up in some seats and are targeting their limited resources in critical areas..

    Kingston is a strange area which doesn't always play by the rules. The Conservatives will doubtless win the Surbiton Wards but a lot will depend on whether the LDs can still win in Kingston and Chessington but Norbiton and Canbury used to be Labour areas as did Tolworth and a Labour revival there could prevent a Conservative takeover at the Guildhall.

    As for Sutton, I would guess the LDs will abandon places like Belmont and Cheam but the question is how they are doing in places like Nonsuch, Carshalton and Worcester Park. You would know this better than I but you wouldn't be the first person to come on here and talk up Conservative prospects in Sutton and come out on the wrong side.

    I was not talking up Tory prospects more talking up Labour ones....
    In Sutton the issue for the LibDems is the number of activists they have lost.....Whether they can import them from Epsom and Reigate and Banstead to help remains to be seen.
    I don't think the Tory vote will go up at all...
This discussion has been closed.