At last a good day for LEAVE. Theresa May's 'considered' entry into the debate was a thinly disguised bomb.
Being charitable I'd guess she's decided Boris's leadership chances have gone and her only serious opponent is Osborne. Nothing wrong with ambition and I'm sure she's could win but she's done REMAIN some serious damage in the process.
Goldman Sachs will have gotten a whole bunch of major figures to talk at conferences. Hillary Clinton is no doubt one (she also spoke at a Bernstein conference I went to), but there will also be people from across the political spectrum - and some of those people will be Brexiters.
They pay Mrs Clinton - and others - to be provocative at conferences, so that fund managers (like me) will go to the conferences, and so GS can try and try and persuade us to trade with them.
So the facts may be right, but the conclusion slanted.
As an aside, I would bet Nigel Farage hits the 'investment bank lecture circuit' after he steps down from the UKIP leadership. He'll soon be pocketing £50k a speech from Goldmans, Morgans and the like. There will be no shortage of interest in getting him to come along and be contentious.
That sentence is very telling. I was discussing the report with my sib, who used to be an economic forecaster. The £4300 figure was a midrange long 5erm forecast. The short term forecast is seperate, though presumably to a degree can be worked out from this report.
When was the last time anyone on PB visited British Home Stores?
They have fallen into that classic gap. They have been undercut by your Primarks of this world and aren't seen as "quality", so they are in the squeezed middle.
In a way, their demise mirrors fundamental changes in British society. Being lower-middle class was in vogue at one time in the 70s and 80s but now it seems as if in order to be trendy you have to be either at the top or bottom.
It has hit a lot of stores / brands. Part of Tesco's trouble is exactly this. People either shop at Aldi / Lidl / Poundland because of cost or some weird trendiness or they want to be seen shopping in Waitrose. Tesco is stuck in the middle. Nobody boosts about having done their weekly in Tescos or Morrisons.
TESCO has been trying to serve seven different market segments from the same stores.
It did well using the CLUBcard to understand which segment people were in (eg couples with young children) and sending them targeted promotions. But is has been less good at presenting (or merchandising) its wares to the different segments (eg TESCO Finest). It seemed to have diverted its talent away from segmentation and merchandising into the US and non food ventures.
It is an interesting point. In comparison, look at GAP. The company operates five primary divisions: the namesake banner, Banana Republic, Old Navy, Intermix, and Athleta. With those different brands they market from rich to poor, cool hipsters to those just looking for function.
I know Tesco has experimented with some bits and pieces like this e.g. Harris + Hoole coffee, but lots of those branches have been placed inside a Tescos. Your Waitrose crowd don't want to be seen going into a Tesco's to buy knobby coffee.
Tescos success was imo about leadership. They were the Heinz ketchup of supermarkets. They absolutely rolled over in the face of Aldi and Lidl - I'll never understand why. Leadership is about quashing your opponents.
By the by I suppose it's worth mentioning they've now returned to profit.
When was the last time anyone on PB visited British Home Stores?
They have fallen into that classic gap. They have been undercut by your Primarks of this world and aren't seen as "quality", so they are in the squeezed middle.
In a way, their demise mirrors fundamental changes in British society. Being lower-middle class was in vogue at one time in the 70s and 80s but now it seems as if in order to be trendy you have to be either at the top or bottom.
It has hit a lot of stores / brands. Part of Tesco's trouble is exactly this. People either shop at Aldi / Lidl / Poundland because of cost or some weird trendiness or they want to be seen shopping in Waitrose. Tesco is stuck in the middle. Nobody boosts about having done their weekly in Tescos or Morrisons.
TESCO has been trying to serve seven different market segments from the same stores.
It did well using the CLUBcard to understand which segment people were in (eg couples with young children) and sending them targeted promotions. But is has been less good at presenting (or merchandising) its wares to the different segments (eg TESCO Finest). It seemed to have diverted its talent away from segmentation and merchandising into the US and non food ventures.
It is an interesting point. In comparison, look at GAP. The company operates five primary divisions: the namesake banner, Banana Republic, Old Navy, Intermix, and Athleta. With those different brands they market from rich to poor, cool hipsters to those just looking for function.
I know Tesco has experimented with some bits and pieces like this e.g. Harris + Hoole coffee, but lots of those branches have been placed inside a Tescos. Your Waitrose crowd don't want to be seen going into a Tesco's to buy knobby coffee.
Tescos success was imo about leadership. They were the Heinz ketchup of supermarkets. They absolutely rolled over in the face of Aldi and Lidl - I'll never understand why. Leadership is about quashing your opponents.
By the by I suppose it's worth mentioning they've now returned to profit.
They got too cocky , bit like the Tories.
There was a takeover bid in the offing, and I have a totally unsubstantiated theory that someone was on the inside trying to wangle the price down a bit by making them crapper than they were.
At last a good day for LEAVE. Theresa May's 'considered' entry into the debate was a thinly disguised bomb.
Being charitable I'd guess she's decided Boris's leadership chances have gone and her only serious opponent is Osborne. Nothing wrong with ambition and I'm sure she's could win but she's done REMAIN some serious damage in the process.
So are we to assume that if the polls stay static, Remainers will now blame May rather than Flopbama?
"The problem—apart from the blunt political threat to a stalwart ally—is that Mr. Obama is stating his policy choice, not what is inevitable. The U.S. is negotiating a trade deal with the EU, but the talks haven’t been going well in part because of the demands of the EU’s multiple special interests and French economic nationalism. The talks might extend into the next U.S. Administration, and they could fail.
The next American President would be wise to begin a trade negotiation with a Tory Britain that is outside the EU—for the deal’s own economic benefits but also to improve U.S.-U.K. ties and provide leverage with the EU to ease the regulatory burdens it wants to impose as part of a trade deal. Our advice to British voters is to ignore Mr. Obama, who is a short timer, and vote in June based on what would make Britain stronger and more prosperous."
Lord. Why fall out with one sitting President when we can fall out with his probable successor too?
These people need their heads examined, they really do.
Oh look someone not in the official LEAVE group has done something mildly provocative. Quick it is the End of the LEAVE campaign, presumably?
I'm very tired of notional Leave supporters decrying every move as it'd upset someone. Much better to turn both cheeks and let the other side walk all over us. Or worse.
Quite. I'm actually quite pleased Leave.EU exists. They have 85,000 twitter followers compared to 37,000 for Vote Leave. Their marketing materials look on point, and they go for the jugular.
"None the less, the speech is in a deeper sense a success. Like the Home Secretary’s procession of Party Conference speeches since 2010, it is a proper, serious, grown-up piece of work. It neither manipulates statistics nor rubbishes opponents. But it is not, as we have seen, without its politics. And most importantly of all, it is less than enthusiatic about Cameron’s deal. One wonders if it will end up being more helpful to Leave than otherwise."
When was the last time anyone on PB visited British Home Stores?
They have fallen into that classic gap. They have been undercut by your Primarks of this world and aren't seen as "quality", so they are in the squeezed middle.
In a way, their demise mirrors fundamental changes in British society. Being lower-middle class was in vogue at one time in the 70s and 80s but now it seems as if in order to be trendy you have to be either at the top or bottom.
It has hit a lot of stores / brands. Part of Tesco's trouble is exactly this. People either shop at Aldi / Lidl / Poundland because of cost or some weird trendiness or they want to be seen shopping in Waitrose. Tesco is stuck in the middle. Nobody boosts about having done their weekly in Tescos or Morrisons.
TESCO has been trying to serve seven different market segments from the same stores.
It did well using the CLUBcard to understand which segment people were in (eg couples with young children) and sending them targeted promotions. But is has been less good at presenting (or merchandising) its wares to the different segments (eg TESCO Finest). It seemed to have diverted its talent away from segmentation and merchandising into the US and non food ventures.
It is an interesting point. In comparison, look at GAP. The company operates five primary divisions: the namesake banner, Banana Republic, Old Navy, Intermix, and Athleta. With those different brands they market from rich to poor, cool hipsters to those just looking for function.
I know Tesco has experimented with some bits and pieces like this e.g. Harris + Hoole coffee, but lots of those branches have been placed inside a Tescos. Your Waitrose crowd don't want to be seen going into a Tesco's to buy knobby coffee.
Tescos success was imo about leadership. They were the Heinz ketchup of supermarkets. They absolutely rolled over in the face of Aldi and Lidl - I'll never understand why. Leadership is about quashing your opponents.
By the by I suppose it's worth mentioning they've now returned to profit.
Retail is detail and knowing your customers - a bit like politics
When was the last time anyone on PB visited British Home Stores?
They have fallen into that classic gap. They have been undercut by your Primarks of this world and aren't seen as "quality", so they are in the squeezed middle.
In a way, their demise mirrors fundamental changes in British society. Being lower-middle class was in vogue at one time in the 70s and 80s but now it seems as if in order to be trendy you have to be either at the top or bottom.
It has hit a lot of stores / brands. Part of Tesco's trouble is exactly this. People either shop at Aldi / Lidl / Poundland because of cost or some weird trendiness or they want to be seen shopping in Waitrose. Tesco is stuck in the middle. Nobody boosts about having done their weekly in Tescos or Morrisons.
TESCO has been trying to serve seven different market segments from the same stores.
It did well using the CLUBcard to understand which segment people were in (eg couples with young children) and sending them targeted promotions. But is has been less good at presenting (or merchandising) its wares to the different segments (eg TESCO Finest). It seemed to have diverted its talent away from segmentation and merchandising into the US and non food ventures.
It is an interesting point. In comparison, look at GAP. The company operates five primary divisions: the namesake banner, Banana Republic, Old Navy, Intermix, and Athleta. With those different brands they market from rich to poor, cool hipsters to those just looking for function.
I know Tesco has experimented with some bits and pieces like this e.g. Harris + Hoole coffee, but lots of those branches have been placed inside a Tescos. Your Waitrose crowd don't want to be seen going into a Tesco's to buy knobby coffee.
Tescos success was imo about leadership. They were the Heinz ketchup of supermarkets. They absolutely rolled over in the face of Aldi and Lidl - I'll never understand why. Leadership is about quashing your opponents.
By the by I suppose it's worth mentioning they've now returned to profit.
Retail is detail and knowing your customers - a bit like politics
"The problem—apart from the blunt political threat to a stalwart ally—is that Mr. Obama is stating his policy choice, not what is inevitable. The U.S. is negotiating a trade deal with the EU, but the talks haven’t been going well in part because of the demands of the EU’s multiple special interests and French economic nationalism. The talks might extend into the next U.S. Administration, and they could fail.
The next American President would be wise to begin a trade negotiation with a Tory Britain that is outside the EU—for the deal’s own economic benefits but also to improve U.S.-U.K. ties and provide leverage with the EU to ease the regulatory burdens it wants to impose as part of a trade deal. Our advice to British voters is to ignore Mr. Obama, who is a short timer, and vote in June based on what would make Britain stronger and more prosperous."
That would be fine but for Hilary Clinton endorsing Obama's view
"The problem—apart from the blunt political threat to a stalwart ally—is that Mr. Obama is stating his policy choice, not what is inevitable. The U.S. is negotiating a trade deal with the EU, but the talks haven’t been going well in part because of the demands of the EU’s multiple special interests and French economic nationalism. The talks might extend into the next U.S. Administration, and they could fail.
The next American President would be wise to begin a trade negotiation with a Tory Britain that is outside the EU—for the deal’s own economic benefits but also to improve U.S.-U.K. ties and provide leverage with the EU to ease the regulatory burdens it wants to impose as part of a trade deal. Our advice to British voters is to ignore Mr. Obama, who is a short timer, and vote in June based on what would make Britain stronger and more prosperous."
That would be fine but for Hilary Clinton endorsing Obama's view
So you don't think Hilary would like to deliver the deal Obama couldn't ?
Comments
Being charitable I'd guess she's decided Boris's leadership chances have gone and her only serious opponent is Osborne. Nothing wrong with ambition and I'm sure she's could win but she's done REMAIN some serious damage in the process.
"The problem—apart from the blunt political threat to a stalwart ally—is that Mr. Obama is stating his policy choice, not what is inevitable. The U.S. is negotiating a trade deal with the EU, but the talks haven’t been going well in part because of the demands of the EU’s multiple special interests and French economic nationalism. The talks might extend into the next U.S. Administration, and they could fail.
The next American President would be wise to begin a trade negotiation with a Tory Britain that is outside the EU—for the deal’s own economic benefits but also to improve U.S.-U.K. ties and provide leverage with the EU to ease the regulatory burdens it wants to impose as part of a trade deal. Our advice to British voters is to ignore Mr. Obama, who is a short timer, and vote in June based on what would make Britain stronger and more prosperous."
Vote Leave by contrast are just bumblers. As for who is more or less xenophobic, contrast their latest tweets regarding Albania: https://twitter.com/vote_leave https://twitter.com/leaveeuofficial
"The problem—apart from the blunt political threat to a stalwart ally—is that Mr. Obama is stating his policy choice, not what is inevitable. The U.S. is negotiating a trade deal with the EU, but the talks haven’t been going well in part because of the demands of the EU’s multiple special interests and French economic nationalism. The talks might extend into the next U.S. Administration, and they could fail.
The next American President would be wise to begin a trade negotiation with a Tory Britain that is outside the EU—for the deal’s own economic benefits but also to improve U.S.-U.K. ties and provide leverage with the EU to ease the regulatory burdens it wants to impose as part of a trade deal. Our advice to British voters is to ignore Mr. Obama, who is a short timer, and vote in June based on what would make Britain stronger and more prosperous."
That would be fine but for Hilary Clinton endorsing Obama's view
So you don't think Hilary would like to deliver the deal Obama couldn't ?