politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Suddenly politics has got exciting and harder to predict

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Suddenly politics has got exciting and harder to predict

Within the next few hours we should get the first full voting intention poll to have been carried out entirely after EdM’s big Brighton speech. Let’s hope that the Sun releases its YouGov survey this side of midnight rather than us having to wait until the morning.

Read the full story here

surbiton

First. rEd for PM.

Sunil_Prasannan

Conservative Business Interests!

anotherDave

welshowl said:

Foxinsoxuk:

Good point you can hand back £120 or whatever dead easy to one section if you claw it back somewhere else.

Suppose the Tories could say " let's cut fuel VAT by x % " and you get a fuel price cut with us rather than Ed's freeze and with no law of unintended consequences risk of cutting supply or the need to buy in candles just in case... But the books have to balance somewhere else.

I'm expecting UKIP to offer £145, by making not having a TV licence a civil, rather than criminal offence.

http://www.ukip.org/newsroom/news/842-ukip-call-for-bbc-non-payment-to-be-made-a-civil-not-criminal-offence

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/bbctrusteeelectionandlicencefee.html

AveryLP

FPT

@Chuvapp

The CBI Survey on September Sales

Key findings:

• 46% of respondents reported that sales volumes were up on a year ago, while 12% said they were down, giving a balance of +34% - the strongest since June 2012 (+42%) and exceeding expectations (+26%)

• Retailers expect sales volumes to grow at a similarly strong pace next month (+31%)

• There was a broad-based increase in sales across many sub-sectors with furniture & carpets, department stores, recreational good retailers and grocers performing strongly:

• A balance of +100% of furniture & carpets retailers said business volumes were up – the strongest since August 1996.

• 52% of department stores said business volumes were up, while 0% said they were down, giving a balance of +52%

• 65% of recreational goods retailers said business volumes were up, while 0% said they were down, giving a balance of +65%

• 50% of grocers said business volumes were up, while 17% said they were down, giving a balance of +33%.

• Chemists were the only sub-sector to report a fall in business volumes (-72%)

• Overall, 22% of retailers said that sales volumes were above average for the time of year, while 10% said they were below average, giving a balance of +12% - the highest survey balance since December 2010 (+18%)

• 36% placed more orders with suppliers than they did a year ago and 22% placed fewer, with the resulting balance of +14%.


Wholesalers

50% of wholesalers said sales volumes were up while 10% said they were down, giving a balance of +40% - the strongest pace of growth since June 2013 (+45%). Most sub-sectors saw growth, with building materials (+100%) and clothing, textiles & footwear (+56%) in the lead. Only food & drink saw a decline in sales (-13%), marking the first year-on-year fall since May. Overall, sales are expected to rise solidly again in the year to October, but at a slower pace than this month (+28%).

Motor traders

64% of motor traders said sales volumes were up while 36% said they were down, giving a balance of +28%, a slower pace of growth than in the previous month (+93%).

surbiton

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

AveryLP

FPT @Chuvapp

Not sure about that, Avery.

I think:

a) Conservative Business Interests has a better ring to it.

and:

b) is more topical given next week's party conference

Sunil

The most important part of the CBI statement was its concluding paragraph:

The best way to raise living standards is through growth. It's only when we start to see solid and sustainable growth that wages will pick up and people will start to feel better off.

The UK is currently experiencing growth which is not only above the country's fifty year trend level; not only above the EU average and all large European countries including Germany; but also above the OECD average and above its individual members such as the US, Japan and Canada.

If this rate of growth can be sustained through to the end of Q2 2015, it will do far more to improve living standards than any regulatory intervention or market fiddling being proposed by Ed Miliband.

So the real question that should be asked today is not whether Ed is right - any economist will tell you price controls don't work both from theory and known practice - but whether Osborne can maintain the current rate of growth in the UK economy through to the election. If he can, the debate on living standards and energy costs will be long dead before voters mark their crosses..

Now we cannot forecast that far forward with a high degree of reliability, even if we exclude the potential impact of external shocks. But the probability of sustained growth is getter higher by the month, This can be concluded not just from UK data but from better figures from our trading partners, especially in the EU and the US.

And we can look at short term indicators in the UK which are all pointing to sustained growth even if maybe a little off its peak in mid summer.

I have posted separately downthread key findings from today's CBI report on September sales, the first of three main retail sales reports for the month. Read it and consider whether its contents are a better or worse guide to the future prospects for UK standards of living than anything said by Ed Miliband in his speech yesterday.

Bobajob

Cabal of Boozy Industrialists?

surbiton

AveryLP said:

FPT

@Chuvapp

The CBI Survey on September Sales

Wholesalers

50% of wholesalers said sales volumes were up while 10% said they were down, giving a balance of +40% - the strongest pace of growth since June 2013(+45%).

Yes, that was just two months back.

Alanbrooke

@Avery

totally agree the best way for living standards is growth.

When can we have a CoE who knows something about wealth creation ?

Alanbrooke

Bobajob said:

Cabal of Boozy Industrialists?

Carpet Bomb Islington

Scott_P

Last week I recounted this tale to a Labour MP. He responded with one word: “Terrifying”. Ed Miliband is starting to frighten people. Until recently he was regarded as someone a bit geeky, awkward and out of his depth; a fairly harmless, if misguided, creature. But not now.

First there was Syria. Whatever the rights and wrongs of Labour’s final position on military intervention, the way Miliband shifted and parsed on a matter of war and peace alarmed many who witnessed it. There was, obviously, anger from David Cameron and his inner circle. But their concern was shared not only by members of Miliband’s own party, but also the civil servants who observed the meetings. “When you’ve got nuclear submarines moving into position you can’t mess around,” said one hawkish Labour MP.

Then, on Tuesday, came Miliband’s conference speech. The commitment to freeze energy prices immediately raised the prospect of power cuts. The right-to-grow policy was described as “Marxist” and “a Mugabe-style land grab”. So suddenly, having arrived in Brighton struggling to distance himself from Gordon Brown and his failed government, Miliband found himself having to distance himself from Harold Wilson and the failed Labour governments of the Seventies.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100238039/awkward-ed-has-now-become-terrifying-ed/

Scott_P

What is instructive about this policy, in other words, is not so much its detail, for there is precious little of that. Rather, it is what it tells us about Mr Miliband’s instincts. It shows that when he sees a problem, his answer is to turn to the state to act, even when it is the state that is the problem. Where the Conservatives have sought to reshape the planning system so as to give local communities a say (even while weighting the incentives to encourage development), Mr Miliband’s policy is to let bureaucrats determine what must be built and where. If businesses do not go along with his ideas, they will be hectored – or punished – until they comply. This is a vision of the state that is not so much Blairite as Bolivarian, with Mr Miliband as the beret-clad leader of a populist crusade which seeks to harness free enterprise to social goals ordained by the state.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/10333503/Labours-housing-policy-is-incoherent-and-statist.html

Scrapheap_as_was

anything less than 45% for Red Ed and it's a disaster....

....

surbiton

Scott_P said:

Last week I recounted this tale to a Labour MP. He responded with one word: “Terrifying”. Ed Miliband is starting to frighten people. Until recently he was regarded as someone a bit geeky, awkward and out of his depth; a fairly harmless, if misguided, creature. But not now.

First there was Syria. Whatever the rights and wrongs of Labour’s final position on military intervention, the way Miliband shifted and parsed on a matter of war and peace alarmed many who witnessed it. There was, obviously, anger from David Cameron and his inner circle. But their concern was shared not only by members of Miliband’s own party, but also the civil servants who observed the meetings. “When you’ve got nuclear submarines moving into position you can’t mess around,” said one hawkish Labour MP.

Then, on Tuesday, came Miliband’s conference speech. The commitment to freeze energy prices immediately raised the prospect of power cuts. The right-to-grow policy was described as “Marxist” and “a Mugabe-style land grab”. So suddenly, having arrived in Brighton struggling to distance himself from Gordon Brown and his failed government, Miliband found himself having to distance himself from Harold Wilson and the failed Labour governments of the Seventies.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100238039/awkward-ed-has-now-become-terrifying-ed/

You're right, Scott. Miliband is terrifying the Tories.

Charles

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

MonikerDiCanio

Of the House of Miliband - " Ils n’ont rien appris, ni rien oublié. "

numbertwelve

I expect a boost of Labour.
Labour are coming out with some high profile, populist policies: who doesn't want lower energy bills? The interesting moment is going to come closer to the election in my opinion: will people, when forced to make the decision, get scared about rocking the boat with Labour? After all, minds will be much more concentrated when these things crop up in an election campaign.

AveryLP

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

The CBI Survey on September Sales

Wholesalers

50% of wholesalers said sales volumes were up while 10% said they were down, giving a balance of +40% - the strongest pace of growth since June 2013(+45%).

Yes, that was just two months back.

St George is like a Russian pole vaulter, Surby, but without the social prejudices.

He breaks his own records is small steps collecting plaudits and awards each time.

surbiton

@Avery.

What % growth does your desperate CoE need in the next twenty months for you to proclaim living standards higher than 2010. After all, you inherited a growing economy in the 3rd quarter of 2010.

Alanbrooke

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

I believe there is Charles, it's called power cuts, no internet no amazon ( no PB! ). Ed's on the case chillax ;-).

Neil

Bubka was Ukranian, Avery.

anotherDave

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.

felix

Conventional wisdom would suggest a poll boost for Labour this week followed by one for the Tories next week.

AveryLP

Neil said:

Bubka was Ukranian, Avery.

I was thinking more of Isambayeva, Neil.

But we can agree to differ.

Bobajob

surbiton said:

Scott_P said:

Last week I recounted this tale to a Labour MP. He responded with one word: “Terrifying”. Ed Miliband is starting to frighten people. Until recently he was regarded as someone a bit geeky, awkward and out of his depth; a fairly harmless, if misguided, creature. But not now.

First there was Syria. Whatever the rights and wrongs of Labour’s final position on military intervention, the way Miliband shifted and parsed on a matter of war and peace alarmed many who witnessed it. There was, obviously, anger from David Cameron and his inner circle. But their concern was shared not only by members of Miliband’s own party, but also the civil servants who observed the meetings. “When you’ve got nuclear submarines moving into position you can’t mess around,” said one hawkish Labour MP.

Then, on Tuesday, came Miliband’s conference speech. The commitment to freeze energy prices immediately raised the prospect of power cuts. The right-to-grow policy was described as “Marxist” and “a Mugabe-style land grab”. So suddenly, having arrived in Brighton struggling to distance himself from Gordon Brown and his failed government, Miliband found himself having to distance himself from Harold Wilson and the failed Labour governments of the Seventies.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100238039/awkward-ed-has-now-become-terrifying-ed/

You're right, Scott. Miliband is terrifying the Tories.

Is this "one Labour MP" Hodges spoke to the very same Labour MP he has used as a source for every other column he's written?

Scott_P

Hypocrisy can be a beautiful thing when done well. To go, as Ed Miliband has done, within four years, from being the minister insisting that energy prices must rise — so uncompetitive green energy producers can be enticed to supply power — to being the opposition leader calling for energy prices to be frozen is a breathtaking double axel that would make Torvill and Dean envious.

Remember this is the very architect of our current energy policy, the man who steered the suicidally expensive Climate Change Act through Parliament; the man who even this week pledged to decarbonise the entire British economy (not just the electricity sector) by 2030, meaning that nobody will be permitted to heat their house with gas.

Has he checked the price of electric heating versus gas recently? The gap is due to grow greater. By 2030 much of the electricity will, in theory, come from offshore wind, which is being promised three times the price that gas-fired power stations get for making electricity. So Mr Miliband is telling us to treble, and freeze, our heating bills at the same time.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article3879192.ece

Bobajob

Alanbrooke said:

Bobajob said:

Cabal of Boozy Industrialists?

Carpet Bomb Islington

Chippy Bumpkin Irishmen

Alanbrooke

surbiton said:

@Avery.

What % growth does your desperate CoE need in the next twenty months for you to proclaim living standards higher than 2010. After all, you inherited a growing economy in the 3rd quarter of 2010.

Pillock, borrowing isn't wealth creation, it's debt. It's not wealth until we pay it back and it doesn't matter whether it's Labour or Conservatives doing the debt bingeing it's not growth.

Charles

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.

Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathy

FrancisUrquhart

"helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more"

I do wish people would stop lumping amazon in with the likes of google and starbucks, when they talk about these massive companies making huge profits and dodging tax on them.

Amazon have huge sales numbers, but despite I'm sure setting themselves up in a "tax efficient" manner, actually make very very little in percentage terms.

In fact, many analysts say they have to calibrate their business away from still thinking of a new start-up trying to land grab as much as possible to one that makes much better returns,

"Investors, comforted by Bezos’s consistency with this strategy over the years, have so much faith in him that they’re willing to tolerate razor-thin or nonexistent profits in exchange for continued market share gains and a promise of windfall profits someday. And by the way, low margins to Bezos are a competitive advantage. If you’re eking out sub-2 percent profits, which Amazon is doing, your market isn’t very enticing to rivals. When margins are nice and fat, your business is a delectable target."

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-01-08/amazons-jeff-bezos-doesnt-care-about-profit-margins

So criticism Amazon for trying to dominant the market and wipe out the competition (they have certainly been extremely aggressive in that respect and ultimately I'm sure they will maximise on it), but currently they aren't making the sort of profit that say a Starbucks do on a cup of coffee.

The reason Amazon can offer you a book or dvd so cheap is they have been ahead of the game with ultra efficient IT / logistics and wafer-thin margins.

Alanbrooke

Bobajob said:

Alanbrooke said:

Bobajob said:

Cabal of Boozy Industrialists?

Carpet Bomb Islington

Chippy Bumpkin Irishmen

Cockney Bob's Insolvent

fitalass

To continue on from the point that @Foxinsoxuk made on the previous thread about this Labour Conference heralding the death of New Labour. I think that this Labour Conference also saw Ed Miliband quietly capitulate to the big Labour Union donors after picking a fight with them earlier this year. I fully expect to see Ed Miliband now quietly shelve that fight while his team and the Unions work out a face saving all around deal that will talk big but see little change to the current set up.

Ed Miliband will now turn his guns on big business until that strategy finally bites him on the behookie as well. Its going to be interesting to if Ed Miliband's internal opponents decide to leave him in place until after the next GE even if the polls swing decisively against the party because they cannot agree on one clear choice as his replacement.

Scrapheap_as_was

Just seen this on Labour Uncut..... Is this Hodges again???

Ed Miliband has chosen the path of least resistance in targeting big bad business. It’s a message that plays well to the party faithful, but the next election will be decided by an audience far larger than a conference hall in Brighton.

An audience that will have read their morning papers and had many of their fears about Labour confirmed.

Atul Hatwal is editor of Labour Uncut


http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/09/25/today-the-tories-are-happy-thats-all-you-need-to-know-about-eds-speech/?utm_source=buffer&utm_campaign=Buffer&utm_content=buffer45e20&utm_medium=twitter

felix

Charles said:

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.

Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathy

I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!

Neil

I thought you might be, Avery. As ever you are dazzled by presentation - Bobajobka set more world records

Bobajob

Alanbrooke said:

surbiton said:

@Avery.

What % growth does your desperate CoE need in the next twenty months for you to proclaim living standards higher than 2010. After all, you inherited a growing economy in the 3rd quarter of 2010.

Pillock, borrowing isn't wealth creation, it's debt. It's not wealth until we pay it back and it doesn't matter whether it's Labour or Conservatives doing the debt bingeing it's not growth.

Clueless Borrowing Idiots

Yorkcity

Carl Maxim ‏@carlmaxim 3h

One person broke the fire brigade picket line at Trumpton, or as they are now known, Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble and Scab.
Retweeted by tom jamieson

JohnLilburne

Mike Smithson said:

Within the next few hours we should get the first full voting intention poll to have been carried out entirely after EdM’s big Brighton speech.

Is that true? YouGov surveys are normally carried out over 2 days and I think they may re-use the second day's results in the following poll - the fact that the recent "blip" of 0% and 1% Labour leads lasted 2 days suggests that the "outlier" reults were used twice.

So, in the normal run of things, surely tomorrow's poll will have been carried out today and yesterday. Unless they are doing a special entirely post-speech poll.

Bobajob

Alanbrooke said:

Bobajob said:

Alanbrooke said:

Bobajob said:

Cabal of Boozy Industrialists?

Carpet Bomb Islington

Chippy Bumpkin Irishmen

Cockney Bob's Insolvent

Due to Child Benefit Injustice

welshowl

MonikerDiCanio said:

Of the House of Miliband - " Ils n’ont rien appris, ni rien oublié. "

Still Ed at this rate will solve Hollande's worries about the French London brain drain - disparation des cerveaux??? :-) - he could end up making Paris look like Dubai Enterprise Zone in comparison.

anotherDave

Charles said:

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.

Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathy

That's corporation tax, rather than rates though isn't it?

Scrapheap_as_was

Is Peter M = Lord of Darkness? Sounds like he's not happy with Red either if so, but ok Bad Al is....

Alastair Campbell‏@campbellclaret1m
Peter M wrong re energy policy being shift to left. It is putting consumer first v anti competitive force. More New Deal than old Labour

RobD

Alanbrooke said:

Bobajob said:

Alanbrooke said:

Bobajob said:

Cabal of Boozy Industrialists?

Carpet Bomb Islington

Chippy Bumpkin Irishmen

Cockney Bob's Insolvent

Clearly bonkers idiot?

Alanbrooke

Bobajob said:

Alanbrooke said:

Bobajob said:

Alanbrooke said:

Bobajob said:

Cabal of Boozy Industrialists?

Carpet Bomb Islington

Chippy Bumpkin Irishmen

Cockney Bob's Insolvent

Due to Child Benefit Injustice

Cant Blame IDS

Morris_Dancer

Good evening, comrades.

Why did Miliband ever try and claim he wasn't Red Ed? Price controls and land confiscations are hardly centrist policies.

surbiton

fitalass said:

To continue on from the point that @Foxinsoxuk made on the previous thread about this Labour Conference heralding the death of New Labour. I think that this Labour Conference also saw Ed Miliband quietly capitulate to the big Labour Union donors after picking a fight with them earlier this year. I fully expect to see Ed Miliband now quietly shelve that fight while his team and the Unions work out a face saving all around deal that will talk big but see little change to the current set up.

Ed Miliband will now turn his guns on big business until that strategy finally bites him on the behookie as well. Its going to be interesting to if Ed Miliband's internal opponents decide to leave him in place until after the next GE even if the polls swing decisively against the party because they cannot agree on one clear choice as his replacement.

Are you going to quote Dan Hodges on the Friday when Ed stands in front of No.10 ?

Sunil_Prasannan

AveryLP said:

Neil said:

Bubka was Ukranian, Avery.

I was thinking more of Isambayeva, Neil.

But we can agree to differ.

I think you mean Isinbayeva, Avery.

Charles

FrancisUrquhart said:

"helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more"

I do wish people would stop lumping amazon in with the likes of google and starbucks, when they talk about these massive companies making huge profits and dodging tax on them.

Amazon have huge sales numbers, but despite I'm sure setting themselves up in a "tax efficient" manner, actually make very very little in percentage terms.

In fact, many analysts say they have to calibrate their business away from still thinking of a new start-up trying to land grab as much as possible to one that makes much better returns,

"Investors, comforted by Bezos’s consistency with this strategy over the years, have so much faith in him that they’re willing to tolerate razor-thin or nonexistent profits in exchange for continued market share gains and a promise of windfall profits someday. And by the way, low margins to Bezos are a competitive advantage. If you’re eking out sub-2 percent profits, which Amazon is doing, your market isn’t very enticing to rivals. When margins are nice and fat, your business is a delectable target."

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-01-08/amazons-jeff-bezos-doesnt-care-about-profit-margins

So criticism Amazon for trying to dominant the market and wipe out the competition (they have certainly been extremely aggressive in that respect and ultimately I'm sure they will maximise on it), but currently they aren't making the sort of profit that say a Starbucks do on a cup of coffee.

The reason Amazon can offer you a book or dvd so cheap is they have been ahead of the game with ultra efficient IT / logistics and wafer-thin margins.

Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer.

Still happy?

NickPalmer

If YouGov was really startling in any direction, we'd be getting Sun tweets by now - even if the results were unwelcome, the journalist's instincts would win.

JohnLilburne

Charles said:

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Charles, why? Giving tax breaks to town centre retail businesses is like offering VAT relief to prop up CD sales. The world has moved on. The high street as we know it is dying, in 20 years it will look completely different.

Alanbrooke

Bobajob said:

Alanbrooke said:

surbiton said:

@Avery.

What % growth does your desperate CoE need in the next twenty months for you to proclaim living standards higher than 2010. After all, you inherited a growing economy in the 3rd quarter of 2010.

Pillock, borrowing isn't wealth creation, it's debt. It's not wealth until we pay it back and it doesn't matter whether it's Labour or Conservatives doing the debt bingeing it's not growth.

Clueless Borrowing Idiots

Clapham Boy's Intelligent.

MonikerDiCanio

Socialist France prequels Miliband 's terreur rogue ;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24240869

Scrapheap_as_was

Is Labour Uncut run by Hodges... another glowing review of Ed's speech... it's all about the 35%...

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/09/25/forget-the-swingers-miliband-is-staking-all-on-his-core-vote-strategy/

Charles

felix said:

Charles said:

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.

Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathy

I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!

Effectively business rates are a way of extracting a share of tax from businesses operating in the UK. They were invented before the internet, so internet only companies don't have the same tax burden as other companies.

NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom

Sunil_Prasannan

MonikerDiCanio said:

Socialist France prequels Miliband 's terreur rogue ;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24240869

"terreur rouge", Moniker.

FrancisUrquhart

"Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer."

I don't deny that, I said so in my post, they have aggressively targeted the market...I am just saying that it is wrong to lump them with many of the other players when it comes to talking about making massive returns.

Analysis of mark-up on a cup of Starbucks, shows a very healthy margins (which don't seem to reflect in the profits declared in the country of sale)....as stated in the piece, Amazon is operating on razor thin margins.

As for killing the rental DVD market...you are having a laugh right? The rental DVD market has been killed by the internet!!! Amazon or no Amazon, there are numerous internet stream providers. Netflix was a massive rental DVD operator, foresaw what was coming (Blockbuster didn't) and now dominants the US streaming market.

Charles

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.

Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathy

That's corporation tax, rather than rates though isn't it?

Not sure of your point? It's about total tax take not the specific line of tax. Their approach, though, reveals a lot about their attitude.

Scrapheap_as_was

I'm on fire - and I've only spent 15 mins this evening as been too busy most of the day.

Another rip-snorter from another Hodges nom-de-plume?

It seems clear to me that the Labour leader's speech, and the policies he announced, will simply reinforce voters' perceptions of the Labour Party - hates business, loves welfare, couldn't give a crap about the deficit - rather than challenging them and expanding his party's appeal.

http://marbury.typepad.com/marbury/2013/09/the-flight-from-the-centre.html

felix

Charles said:

felix said:

Charles said:

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.

Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathy

I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!

Effectively business rates are a way of extracting a share of tax from businesses operating in the UK. They were invented before the internet, so internet only companies don't have the same tax burden as other companies.

NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom

I think business rates are actually taxes on property - you pay them if you have it and you don't pay them if you don't - it's that simple.

surbiton

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Is Labour Uncut run by Hodges... another glowing review of Ed's speech... it's all about the 35%...

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/09/25/forget-the-swingers-miliband-is-staking-all-on-his-core-vote-strategy/

When PBTories scour Labour Uncut, things must be getting desperate for them.

Scrapheap_as_was

Popcorn .....

Owen Jones‏@OwenJones842m
The coffin opens RT @guardiannews Peter Mandelson criticises Ed Miliband's energy plan http://gu.com/p/3j3q8/tf

Charles

JohnLilburne said:

Charles said:

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Charles, why? Giving tax breaks to town centre retail businesses is like offering VAT relief to prop up CD sales. The world has moved on. The high street as we know it is dying, in 20 years it will look completely different.

Probably - but at the moment we are perpetuating an advantage in favour of one (asset light, foreign based) business model.

I'd advocate taxes being universal, low and hard to avoid.

Alanbrooke

JohnLilburne said:

Charles said:

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Charles, why? Giving tax breaks to town centre retail businesses is like offering VAT relief to prop up CD sales. The world has moved on. The high street as we know it is dying, in 20 years it will look completely different.

why should internet cos. have a stable market, access to consumers, an enforceable system of law and payment and the pass the cost of providing this infrastructure on to their competitors through tax avoidance ?

AveryLP

surbiton said:

@Avery.

What % growth does your desperate CoE need in the next twenty months for you to proclaim living standards higher than 2010. After all, you inherited a growing economy in the 3rd quarter of 2010.

Surby

A few Labour myths need dispelling with facts.

1. Osborne inherited a growing economy in 2010 but it was growing at a lower rate than Germany's, that of the US, as well as the average EU27 and OECD growth rates.

2. Osborne did not "choke off growth by cutting too far and too fast". The profile of growth was broadly similar in all the comparator countries and regions: namely growth accelerating in 2010 following by rapid deceleration in 2011-12. Only Germany and the EU27 average suffered a "double dip" or "W" recession, although it is true the UK came very, very close to falling back into recession.

3. Over the course of 2012 H2 - 2013 H2, the UK's growth has accelerated faster than in the comparators.

4. The OECD (and almost all economic commentators) are forecasting that by the end of 2014 the UK will have a grown more over the 2010-2014 period than both Germany and the US, as well as the EU27 and OECD averages.

So under Gordon the UK fell to the bottom of the pile. Under George we have reached the top.

What more do you want, Surby? To overtake China?

Scrapheap_as_was

surbiton said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Is Labour Uncut run by Hodges... another glowing review of Ed's speech... it's all about the 35%...

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/09/25/forget-the-swingers-miliband-is-staking-all-on-his-core-vote-strategy/

When PBTories scour Labour Uncut, things must be getting desperate for them.

Why? I've not really heard of it in my pbtory world, is it an anti-labour site????

JohnLilburne

Charles said:

NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom

(4) people don't want to buy nearly so much stuff from shops any more.

surbiton

Charles said:

felix said:

Charles said:

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.

Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathy

I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!

Effectively business rates are a way of extracting a share of tax from businesses operating in the UK. They were invented before the internet, so internet only companies don't have the same tax burden as other companies.

NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom

You do have a point. The question is how to legislate.

Charles

FrancisUrquhart said:

"Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer."

I don't deny that, I said so in my post, they have aggressively targeted the market...I am just saying that it is wrong to lump them with many of the other players when it comes to talking about making massive returns.

Analysis of mark-up on a cup of Starbucks, shows a very healthy margins (which don't seem to reflect in the profits declared in the country of sale)....as stated in the piece, Amazon is operating on razor thin margins.

As for killing the rental DVD market...you are having a laugh right? The rental DVD market has been killed by the internet!!!

Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?

My issue is that they have won market share (fair play) by taking advantage of a 20% price differential due to a tax arbitrage. Why does the government favour one business model over another?

felix

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Popcorn .....

Owen Jones‏@OwenJones842m
The coffin opens RT @guardiannews Peter Mandelson criticises Ed Miliband's energy plan http://gu.com/p/3j3q8/tf

Hmmm - Labour really love their own folk don't they - easy to see why McBride was able to flourish so abundantly.

Charles

felix said:

Charles said:

felix said:

Charles said:

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.

Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathy

I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!

Effectively business rates are a way of extracting a share of tax from businesses operating in the UK. They were invented before the internet, so internet only companies don't have the same tax burden as other companies.

NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom

I think business rates are actually taxes on property - you pay them if you have it and you don't pay them if you don't - it's that simple.

They are. And my argument is that internet only businesses should contribute to the business rate pot & the additional amount should be used to reduce to overall rate for everyone.

welshowl

Sunil_Prasannan said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

Socialist France prequels Miliband 's terreur rogue ;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24240869

"terreur rouge", Moniker.

Oh I don't know, terreur rogue might be just as right as terreur rouge.

Alanbrooke

Charles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

"Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer."

I don't deny that, I said so in my post, they have aggressively targeted the market...I am just saying that it is wrong to lump them with many of the other players when it comes to talking about making massive returns.

Analysis of mark-up on a cup of Starbucks, shows a very healthy margins (which don't seem to reflect in the profits declared in the country of sale)....as stated in the piece, Amazon is operating on razor thin margins.

As for killing the rental DVD market...you are having a laugh right? The rental DVD market has been killed by the internet!!!

Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?

My issue is that they have won market share (fair play) by taking advantage of a 20% price differential due to a tax arbitrage. Why does the government favour one business model over another?

I'm still trying to work out how a business with razor thin margins can keep opening multi million pound warehouses and make massive investments in stock.

Sunil_Prasannan

TSE won't be happy!

Man U 1-0 Liverpool in the League Cup...

JohnLilburne

Alanbrooke said:

why should internet cos. have a stable market, access to consumers, an enforceable system of law and payment and the pass the cost of providing this infrastructure on to their competitors through tax avoidance ?

They shouldn't, but Charles specifically stated we should find a way of charging them the equivalent of business rates - which to me seems to simply penalise them for finding a more efficient business model than bricks & mortar in the high street. Their competitors should either move online or find a business model that encourages both footfall and in-store spend. The high street of he future will probably be half to a quarter the size it is now, there seems to be no point trying to keep it going.

GIN1138

We won't know the real fall out of Milliband's speech until the weekend polls, IMO.

I suspect it's possible both Labour and Tories may get a boost - Labour, because cutting energy prices will obviously be popular (in theory anyway) and the Tories because the speech may be enough to bring a few of the less devoted UKIP'ers back to the Tories.

Sunil_Prasannan

Charles said:

Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?

HMV is still alive and kicking, Charles.

Sadly, the same can't be said of ModelZone

felix

Charles said:

felix said:

Charles said:

felix said:

Charles said:

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

surbiton said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Conservative Business Interests!

More like IoD. Many smal business people might like the Business Rates freeze. After all, every business in a property pays Rates, many don't pay CT.

I do wonder if there is merit in finding a way to make internet only companies contribute something equivalent to business rates? The funds raised (let's say - haven't done the math - but 1% of gross profit) can then be used to reduce business rates - helpful to the economy and no one will really care about google or amazon having to pay a little more

Amazon has warehouses, Google has offices, presumably they pay rates on those.

Yes, but much less that their retail competitors. Assume google still puts their UK sales through Ireland, and Amazon has a cute trick to "minimise" VAT I have little sympathy

I'm not sure why a company that doesen't have retail outlets should pay rates on them!

Effectively business rates are a way of extracting a share of tax from businesses operating in the UK. They were invented before the internet, so internet only companies don't have the same tax burden as other companies.

NB: I would use the proceeds to reduce taxes for other companies - all about making the competitive landscape as even as possible. For instance, in Kensington there are a vast number of empty retail sites. This is for 3 reasons: (1) no local resident consumers (2) the Westfield effect and (3) extremely high rates last reviewed at the height of the boom

I think business rates are actually taxes on property - you pay them if you have it and you don't pay them if you don't - it's that simple.

They are. And my argument is that internet only businesses should contribute to the business rate pot & the additional amount should be used to reduce to overall rate for everyone.

It sounds to me a rather 'canutian' response to the real world - I guess you'd want e-mails to be charged at that same rate as land letters.

RobD

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Why? I've not really heard of it in my pbtory world, is it an anti-labour site????

keep up, our nom de plume is now 'pb hodges' ;-)

Neil

Unbelievable comeback in the America's Cup comes off - I wonder what the odds were when Oracle was 8-1 down!

AveryLP

Alanbrooke said:

@Avery

totally agree the best way for living standards is growth.

When can we have a CoE who knows something about wealth creation ?

Oxford does PPE degress, Mr. Brooke.

But there is no reason to stop Manchester doing WCs.

MonikerDiCanio

Sunil_Prasannan said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

Socialist France prequels Miliband 's terreur rogue ;


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24240869

"terreur rouge", Moniker.

Rouge rogue terreur ;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24273380

Bobajob

NickPalmer said:

If YouGov was really startling in any direction, we'd be getting Sun tweets by now - even if the results were unwelcome, the journalist's instincts would win.

Clearly Bounce Invisible

JohnLilburne

Charles said:

My issue is that they have won market share (fair play) by taking advantage of a 20% price differential due to a tax arbitrage. Why does the government favour one business model over another?

Doesn't Luxemburg charge VAT on CDs then?

Anorak

felix said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Popcorn .....

Owen Jones‏@OwenJones842m
The coffin opens RT @guardiannews Peter Mandelson criticises Ed Miliband's energy plan http://gu.com/p/3j3q8/tf

Hmmm - Labour really love their own folk don't they - easy to see why McBride was able to flourish so abundantly.

The Graun has a peculiar moderation policy. After deleting the first post, which "didn't abide by our community standards", the next two are "Piss off Peter" and "F*ck off you slimy bastard".

The latter two appear to "up to standard", leaving me very curious about that first post. What on earth could it have said?

welshowl

Charles: taxes low universal hard to avoid.

Absolutely!

felix

Anorak said:

felix said:

Scrapheap_as_was said:

Popcorn .....

Owen Jones‏@OwenJones842m
The coffin opens RT @guardiannews Peter Mandelson criticises Ed Miliband's energy plan http://gu.com/p/3j3q8/tf

Hmmm - Labour really love their own folk don't they - easy to see why McBride was able to flourish so abundantly.

The Graun has a peculiar moderation policy. After deleting the first post, which "didn't abide by our community standards", the next two are "Piss off Peter" and "F*ck off you slimy bastard".

The latter two appear to "up to standard", leaving me very curious about that first post. What on earth could it have said?

LOL

Alanbrooke

JohnLilburne said:

Alanbrooke said:

why should internet cos. have a stable market, access to consumers, an enforceable system of law and payment and the pass the cost of providing this infrastructure on to their competitors through tax avoidance ?

They shouldn't, but Charles specifically stated we should find a way of charging them the equivalent of business rates - which to me seems to simply penalise them for finding a more efficient business model than bricks & mortar in the high street. Their competitors should either move online or find a business model that encourages both footfall and in-store spend. The high street of he future will probably be half to a quarter the size it is now, there seems to be no point trying to keep it going.

Charles imo is simply stating the obvious, if the tax base were bigger becuause internet multi nats were paying their VAT in this country then rates and other taxes would be lower. These guys arguably haven't worked out a more efficient business model, merely a better tax scam.

FrancisUrquhart

"Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?"

I apologize...I am multi-tasking here...Woolies especially had a lot of problems, not just Amazon stealing their market share in DVD's.

However, the internet via streaming, will seriously effect physical DVD market and in the both the US and here, Amazon don't have anywhere near a monopoly on that nor the replacement for the CD, music downloads / streaming.

Again, I'm not arguing about how they got to this stage, just that people always say well that Amazon they is making massive % returns, like Starbucks, Google, etc...when it isn't currently true.

They might have land grabbed a lot of the physical CD / DVD sector, but now that rug is being seriously plugged with all the music, tv and movie streaming services.

Yorkcity

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/damian-carrington-blog/2013/sep/25/energy-energy

Energy giants will blink first in Miliband's price freeze challenge.

Tykejohnno

Neil said:

Unbelievable comeback in the America's Cup comes off - I wonder what the odds were when Oracle was 8-1 down!

Didn't Sir Ben Ainslie join the team when they were 8 - 1 down ?

anotherDave

Charles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

"Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer."

I don't deny that, I said so in my post, they have aggressively targeted the market...I am just saying that it is wrong to lump them with many of the other players when it comes to talking about making massive returns.

Analysis of mark-up on a cup of Starbucks, shows a very healthy margins (which don't seem to reflect in the profits declared in the country of sale)....as stated in the piece, Amazon is operating on razor thin margins.

As for killing the rental DVD market...you are having a laugh right? The rental DVD market has been killed by the internet!!!

Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?

My issue is that they have won market share (fair play) by taking advantage of a 20% price differential due to a tax arbitrage. Why does the government favour one business model over another?

This is an argument for a common EU tax rate.

felix

Alanbrooke said:

JohnLilburne said:

Alanbrooke said:

why should internet cos. have a stable market, access to consumers, an enforceable system of law and payment and the pass the cost of providing this infrastructure on to their competitors through tax avoidance ?

They shouldn't, but Charles specifically stated we should find a way of charging them the equivalent of business rates - which to me seems to simply penalise them for finding a more efficient business model than bricks & mortar in the high street. Their competitors should either move online or find a business model that encourages both footfall and in-store spend. The high street of he future will probably be half to a quarter the size it is now, there seems to be no point trying to keep it going.

Charles imo is simply stating the obvious, if the tax base were bigger becuause internet multi nats were paying their VAT in this country then rates and other taxes would be lower. These guys arguably haven't worked out a more efficient business model, merely a better tax scam.

He isn't stating the obvious - he wants companies that have no shops to pay rates on them - the ultimate in restrictive practices - the issue of where a company has its headquarters re corporation tax is a different matter.

Sunil_Prasannan

FrancisUrquhart said:

"Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?"

I apologize...I am multi-tasking here...Woolies especially had a lot of problems, not just Amazon stealing their market share in DVD's.

However, the internet via streaming, is killing physical CD / DVD sales full stop and in the both the US and here, Amazon don't have anywhere near a monopoly on that nor the replacement for the CD, music downloads etc.

Again, I'm not arguing about how they got to this stage, just that people always say well that Amazon they is making massive % returns, like Starbucks, Google, etc...when it isn't currently true.

HMV is still alive and kicking.

http://www.hmv.com/store-locator/

welshowl

MonikerDiCanio said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

MonikerDiCanio said:

Socialist France prequels Miliband 's terreur rogue ;


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-24240869

"terreur rouge", Moniker.

Rouge rogue terreur ;

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-24273380

Terreur rouge rogue ( or rogue rouge I suppose). Adjectives follow the noun - well generally. ;-)

Alanbrooke

AveryLP said:

Alanbrooke said:

@Avery

totally agree the best way for living standards is growth.

When can we have a CoE who knows something about wealth creation ?

Oxford does PPE degress, Mr. Brooke.

But there is no reason to stop Manchester doing WCs.

PPE degress ? Is Oxford twinned with Allo Allo ?

Anorak

Tykejohnno said:

Neil said:

Unbelievable comeback in the America's Cup comes off - I wonder what the odds were when Oracle was 8-1 down!

Didn't Sir Ben Ainslie join the team when they were 8 - 1 down ?

He joined at 4-1 down, so he endured a bad start, but since then, WOW.

The kiwis must be gutted: a couple of races ago they were leading in light winds when the race was called off for not finishing in the allotted time. They were less than two minutes from the line...

Tykejohnno

Lord Ashcroft must really does have a dislike for Cameron,after all the crap labour poured on this guy.

Lord Ashcroft tells Labour activists election is party's to lose

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-24228750

FrancisUrquhart

"Didn't Sir Ben Ainslie join the team when they were 8 - 1 down ?"

Remember Team USA started the event on "-2"....

Neil

Tykejohnno said:

Neil said:

Unbelievable comeback in the America's Cup comes off - I wonder what the odds were when Oracle was 8-1 down!

Didn't Sir Ben Ainslie join the team when they were 8 - 1 down ?

Not quite at 8-1 down but reminiscent enough of last year to make you wonder whether someone on the other team made the mistake of making him angry

welshowl

anotherDave said:

Charles said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

"Amazon killed the DVD retail market by shipping their product from Luxembourg and avoiding the need to charge VAT. They used this to undercut prices, keeping the upside for themselves and causing significant job losses and social costs for the UK tax payer."

I don't deny that, I said so in my post, they have aggressively targeted the market...I am just saying that it is wrong to lump them with many of the other players when it comes to talking about making massive returns.

Analysis of mark-up on a cup of Starbucks, shows a very healthy margins (which don't seem to reflect in the profits declared in the country of sale)....as stated in the piece, Amazon is operating on razor thin margins.

As for killing the rental DVD market...you are having a laugh right? The rental DVD market has been killed by the internet!!!

Point of order: RETAIL not rental. Been to Woolies or HMV recently?

My issue is that they have won market share (fair play) by taking advantage of a 20% price differential due to a tax arbitrage. Why does the government favour one business model over another?

This is an argument for a common EU tax rate.

Common EU tax rate: I'm sure the business ministers of Norway, Switzerland, Gibraltar, et al would agree enthusiastically if they can tear themselves away from popping the champagne corks at the thought of it.