Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » There’s a mismatch between GE2015 overall outcome betting a
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » There’s a mismatch between GE2015 overall outcome betting and the odds that can be had in individual seats
The best odds you can currently get on a Conservative majority at the next election are 4.0 (3/1 in old money), which in isolation is a good bet if and only if you think the probability of a 2015 Cameron majority is higher than 25%.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Thanks for guest post.
With Labour maj drifting towards 2/1 is there a similar phenomenon on the Labour side ?
Should we not be looking to back the Tories in Bootle?
Thanks very much Richard.
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/251881/Regulating_migrant_access_to_health_in_UK_-_consultation_response.pdf
I guess technically this is a BIG voodoo poll?
The individual constituencies vs national result comparison is a way of making easy money if you know what you're doing.
In 2010 you could get the exact same odds for a Conservative win in Keighley as for an overall Conservative majority - a clear no-brainer as to which was the best value bet.
Similar opportunities will be there for 2015. For example when you add in incumbancy bonuses and demographic change and its hard to see the Conservatives getting 300 MPs (let alone an overall majority) without wining Warwickshire North.
The big question is when will the tipping point occur ? When will the voters decide to come out of their usual mid term torpor and reflect more decisively on the makeup of the future government.
The four major factors will be :
1. The economy stupid
2. The fixed term parliament
3. The length of the down wash from the Euro elections
4. The scope of the bitterness from the No win in the Scottish independence referendum.
Labour of course had the biggest ground game in 2010 and came 3rd.
LD HOLD.
*U.K. SEPT. GOVERNMENT REVENUE RISES 7%; SPENDING UP 2.5%
World First @World_First
*U.K. SEPT. BUDGET DEFICIT 11.1 BLN PNDS; FORECAST 11.3B PNDS
In 2012/13, public sector net borrowing excluding temporary effects of financial interventions and also excluding the effects of the transfer of the Royal Mail Pension Plan and the transfers from the Bank of England Asset Purchase Facility Fund was £115.4 billion. This was £3.1 billion lower than in 2011/12.
In 2012/13, public sector net borrowing excluding temporary effects of financial interventions (PSNB ex) was £81.0 billion. This was £37.5 billion lower than in 2011/12, when it was £118.5 billion.
In September 2013, the £4.0 billion transferred from the Bank of England Asset Purchase Facility Fund to HM Treasury did not reduce the public sector net borrowing excluding temporary effects of financial interventions (PSNB ex).
In September 2013, the £3.2 billion received in cash from the sale of Lloyds banking group shares did not reduce PSNB ex. However, it did reduce the public sector net cash requirement by £3.2 billion and public sector net debt excluding temporary effects of financial interventions by £586 million.
In September 2013, public sector net borrowing excluding temporary effects of financial interventions (PSNB ex) was £11.1 billion. This was £1.0 billion lower than in September 2012, when it was £12.1 billion.
Public sector net debt excluding temporary effects of financial interventions (PSND ex) was £1,211.8 billion at the end of September 2013, equivalent to 75.9% of gross domestic product (GDP).
The central government net cash requirement for the 2013/14 year to date was £39.7 billion, £12.4 billion lower than the same period in 2012/13.
People were voting on which party to govern in 2010 and still chose the LibDems. Punters need to look outside of the Lab/Con monopoly in individual seats just as the constituents do.
Public Sector Net Borrowing £1bn LOWER in September this year compared to last year. via @statisticsONS ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/psa/pu…
Whilst I remain optimistic about my bet with Tim I do not see any sign of a real change in borrowing levels overall albeit George is doing extremely well with the net cash requirement.
I couldn't quite believe the BBC's coverage of the nuclear power deal last night. Despite widespread criticism in the FT/Guardian/Telegraph the BBC acts like the mouthpiece of the government. Perhaps it's because Labour has nothing to say? Does the BBC have no problem with parroting the government's line so long as the opposition doesn't complain?
An almost 4,000 majority in 2010 is hardly "only just". Also the good people of Eastleigh chose to re-elect a LibDem in very difficult circumstances with both the Conservatives and Ukip throwing the kitchen sink at the seat.
You might also note that LibDem seat numbers and their % national score are often unrelated as the general elections from 1974 to 2010 indicate.
It's worth reading - it's a hoot!
The public said don't do "X".
On careful consideration, and bearing in mind all the factors, we're doing "X"
The other thing that stands out is that the (inevitably, self selected) NHS respondents are a lot more hard line than the general public.
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Labour-parliamentary-candidate-Kingswood-steps/story-19887684-detail/story.html
Huppert appears safe - despite his opposition to the A14 upgrade.
CON % in Cambridge in GE's
2010 : 25.6%
2005 : 16.5%
Lab % in Cambridge in GE's
2010 : 24.3%
2005 : 34.0 %
LD% in Cambridge in GE's
2010 : 39.1%
2005 : 44 %
If they are smart they'll present themselves as the only party able to beat the LDs - the classic squeeze message that the yellows have used so often.
I've got UKIP at 6/1 in Eastleigh which I regard as good value.
More likely Con HOLD Corby as Scots head home ....
I think we have all noticed that..
"the deficit for the first six months of the fiscal year at £56.7bn, down 9pc on last year. (This strips out one off effects such as the £3.2bn sale of Lloyds shares, and the £4bn transferred from the Bank of England's asset purchases)."
"If any party has a chance of beating the LDs in Eastleigh it must be UKIP. They got a good second place in the by-election - something that wasn't predicted by any of the polls."
Cough ....
http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/10/21/why-northerners-dont-vote-tory/
He doesn't come to any sort of conclusion other than brand. There is no doubt a problem here, but I think the bigger split is between urban and suburban/rural, and there are more urban areas in the north and midlands than in the south.
Here is Peter's colleague Anthony Wells and Neil O'Brien (now an adviser to Osborne) with a useful huge tome:
http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/publications/northern lights.pdf
Implications on betting as well. The Tories just don't win many big city seats these days. I don't know if that is going to change.
I note in the Inverness constituency betting that Danny Alexander is odds-on FAV to hold his seat, which doesn't really chime with talk of SLD armageddon. Even if a mainland SLD wipeout is a bit far-fetched, neutral observers might still expect Danny to be longer than EVS, given the limited information on SLD VI available to us.
Talking of growth Avery's SWIFT nowcast figure of 0.8% on Friday was a little disappointing. People have been triming back their forecasts a little as there were once suggestions it might be as high as 1.2%. I think 1% growth would be far more noteworthy and have a bigger influence on economic optimism than something short of that.
I do not expect an immediate reaction in the polls but the tories will want to get back on the right track and get to cross over if only for the likely Labour reaction.
As Dr Spyn points out upthread, Kingswood is a particularly interesting case - you could get 3/1 on a Conservative hold until a few weeks ago, which looked excellent value at the time, and in retrospect looks even more so now that Labour have got themselves into a spot of bother with their choice of candidate. That may make the 2/1 currently available a good bet if you think that the Tories will at least do reasonably well overall.
Czech Republic game
If anyone would like to take part, entries will close at 7am on Friday.
Game includes opinion poll and background links.
http://www.electiongame.co.uk/czechrep13/
Many thanks,
DC
Yes, for Apr-Sept this year it is £56.7bn compared to £62.6bn last April-Sept. Also comparing 2013 VAT for SEPT to 2012 Vat for SEPT, its up 4.1% and Income Tax and CGT are up 11.9%.
http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm:77-304804
So who will come third in terms of seats in Scotland next time? If you could get reasonable odds on the tories it might be worth a look.
In general I'm not a fan of trying to take too much account of local considerations, because local considerations more often than not have rather less impact than people imagine. And backing a spread of seats in a particular way is usually a good way to go.
I must congratulate the editor for the naughty sub-heading.
(MikeK, before you go apoplectic, this is called a "joke".)
The other factor is that all parties have new and rather good/interesting candidates so this is a genuinely interesting and 3-way marginal.
But 4/6 odds-on FAV ?? Nope. That is just a daft price given the dire situation the SLDs are in.
He should be no shorter that EVS, and would only be value at 2/1.
BRITISH branches of Tesco throw away a fiver’s worth of alcohol every year, they have confirmed.
Although each store discards tons of fresh bread, fruit and vegetables, staff cannot remember the last time booze stayed on the shelf more than a week.
Branch manager Tom Logan said: “We’re shovelling rotten salad into the skip every night, but a can of Stella hasn’t gone past its ‘drink by’ date since the last but one Labour government... http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/tesco-throwing-away-four-cans-of-lager-per-year-2013102280529
If No (far more likely, IMO) then the SNP will get a massive surge as the more MPs they have at Westminster, the better deal they'll get under Devomax - even, potentially (improbably so, but still....) holding the balance of power in a hung/near-hung Parliament.
Either way, the LDs get slaughtered - they've proved to be unfaithful to their manifesto and are determined to drive UP power costs, whilst also defacing the Highlands and moors.
As Tim points out Danny has (ab)used his position for considerable advantages for the constituency, he has been high profile and generally regarded as competent, even by those not in his own party. I expect a fairly comfortable hold.
The point remains: those changes bring in more wards from Brent so do not favour the Tories. The fact that they got a 9.8% increase in their vote in 2010 is remarkable. Whether they can keep those votes is another matter. The other issue is how the anti-Tory vote will split between Labour and the Lib Dems and whether this could let the Tories through.
Suggested pricing:
Next UK GE - 3rd largest party in Scotland by seats
LD 4/6
Con 3/1
SNP 7/2
What do you think? Would you put 50 quid on the Tories at 3/1 ?
The anomaly is really the 4.1 lay price for a Tory Majority, which as many posters have commented is far too short. In view of the difficulties Dave faces, 6.0 would be nearer the mark. You are absolutely right though. If you think 4.1 is about right, you should be backing Blue in all these constituencies and more - ad don't touch Betfair.
To answer Parick's query early in the thread....Yes, Richard's third option is such a strong hedge that it is virtually an arbitrage. The only real down side is that you tie up quite a lot of money for a small return.
Tissue Price also points out correctly that price movements on the Individual Constituency betting markets lag those on the overall result, which makes the former a happy hunting ground for punters willing to do a little bit of research.
"Which is the most popular party in France?
Not hapless President Hollande and his Socialists, sure? No. They are down to 21 percent in the polls. Nor is it the centre-Right Gaullistes, who are on measly 22 percent – and have scarcely ever been less popular.
The shocking truth is that the most popular political party in France, according to one recent poll, is the Front National, supported by almost one in four French voters.
The Front National is beyond the pale. They are not simply a protest party, but extreme. Their political philosophy, in so far as they have one, seems to me to derive from a reading of Jean Raspail’s dystopian novel, the Camp of the Saints. Pessimistic, they seem to lack any uplifting vision of France or the future.
So why are they doing so well? > http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/douglascarswellmp/100242451/the-front-national-is-the-most-popular-party-in-france-are-you-happy-now-eurocrats/
Implication of that is that you think it is not worth charging.
http://www3.camden.gov.uk/votes/map/
I'd give Hampstead a miss though. The Tories did exceptionally well there last time and Glenda only needs a few of LD voters to return 'home'. She's pretty safe, imo.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_Siddiq
Titters ....
Shadsy - Dunfermline by-election
Lab 1/4
SNP 11/4
LD 50/1
Still think Hampstead is a tough ask for the Blue team, but some of the Labour vote would have been personal, so a shade less tough than I thought.
Looks the right pedigree for Hampstead!
Yesterday I had a brief conversation with a well known expert on political history, who is also fairly senior within the Parliamentary Labour Party about the likely result of the Scottish Independence Referendum.
To my surprise he anticipated that the referendum would be much closer than current expectations. His reasons were (in the following order of priority):
1. The very poor state of the Labour Party North of the border- to the extent that he thought it would struggle to get the vote out on the day.
2. The continuing popularity of the SNP government- he felt that this would have more of an effect as the referendum drew closer.
3. The attempts by the SNP to eat into Labour's working class Scottish vote for the purposes of the referendum by espousing "socialist" policies.
He still thought that on balance "No" would win but clearly felt that the odds were in the 55/45 region rather than a dead cert. Obviously he agreed that a "Yes" would have cataclysmic effects for the whole of British politics but did not elaborate on what they might be. It was evident that the potential for a Yes vote is currently giving the upper echelons of the Labour Party nightmares.
A "Yes" vote would be cataclysmic for Labour - 41 red seats gone, 1 blue seat gone.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03dsk4d/The_Reith_Lectures_Grayson_Perry_Playing_to_the_Gallery_2013_Beating_the_Bounds/
In recent weeks we have had a newspaper and a leaflet from the Yes campaign which seems well funded and organised. We have had a letter from the no campaign who look very disorganised and more than a little disunited with Brown's mucking about.
The ability of the SNP to use the government to hand out sweeties and promises pre the vote is not to be underestimated.
The point is not so much that such a result would have terrible consequences for Labour (which is self-evident) but that senior circles within the Labour party are clearly taking the possibility of such a result very seriously indeed.
* Apologies- I am not sure how to embed your posts in my reply so I have given up trying!