Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Some brighter polling news for the Tories – today’s YouGov

124

Comments

  • Paywall

    An inquiry into the implosion of the Co-operative Bank and revelations about its former chairman is being drawn up George Osborne and bank regulators, it has emerged.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3926972.ece
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 22,386
    Bobajob said:

    Leave Cam alone on drugs. Leave the Rev alone. Go on his record.
    Drugs and sex have no place in politics - irrelevant, common, and no worse than getting pissed.
    Let any PBer or hack who has never taken a drug cast the first stoned.

    I think there's a bit of a difference between drinking a couple of glasses of pinot grigio and being a crack addict...
  • Good afternoon, everyone.

    Betting Post

    Backed Wales to win the 2014 Six Nations Triple Crown at 5.5 with Ladbrokes.

    The odds looks a bit mad to me. The Triple Crown is to win all home nations matches (so Wales would need to beat Scotland, Ireland and England). Wales are favourites to win the whole tournament but fourth favourite (including No Winner at 2.63) to win the Triple Crown. I don't get that.

    Wales and England should easily beat Scotland and almost as easily do away with Ireland. Wales are the better team right now, and England Vs Wales is one of the final matches, I think.

    England are 3.5 to win the tournament but only 3.25 to win the Triple Crown. That seems like a mismatch when Wales are 2.88 and 5.5 respectively. Home advantage *may* help England, but if I've read the rest of it right then the bet amounts to 5.5 on Wales beating England.

    I actually went to check the odds on Scotland finishing last, but the Wooden Spoon market isn't up yet.

    You can get 6.0 with Paddy Power

    Full disclosure, I'm also on this bet.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    Oh and for sensible PM questioning watch the heads of the select committee at the Liason Committee meetings.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782

    Good afternoon, everyone.

    Betting Post

    Backed Wales to win the 2014 Six Nations Triple Crown at 5.5 with Ladbrokes.

    The odds looks a bit mad to me. The Triple Crown is to win all home nations matches (so Wales would need to beat Scotland, Ireland and England). Wales are favourites to win the whole tournament but fourth favourite (including No Winner at 2.63) to win the Triple Crown. I don't get that.

    Wales and England should easily beat Scotland and almost as easily do away with Ireland. Wales are the better team right now, and England Vs Wales is one of the final matches, I think.

    England are 3.5 to win the tournament but only 3.25 to win the Triple Crown. That seems like a mismatch when Wales are 2.88 and 5.5 respectively. Home advantage *may* help England, but if I've read the rest of it right then the bet amounts to 5.5 on Wales beating England.

    I actually went to check the odds on Scotland finishing last, but the Wooden Spoon market isn't up yet.

    Interesting - those odds suggest that either something is miss-priced, or that England are expected to lose to one of France/Italy whilst Wales are expected to win. Clearly I don't expect that to be Italy - so are France that much more likely to beat Wales than England?

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    If you want a better PMQs - get Ed to ask better questions.

    He exited the chamber a total laughing stock.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Co Op bank to face inquiry.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25017409

    Plenty of commentators discovering 20-20 hindsight. Who had looked at the qualification of The Co-Op's board at the time of the merger with Britannia BS, or when Rev Flowers reached the top.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Here is something to cheer up the PB Kinnocks after PMQs...

    @TelePolitics: Blog: A year ago, the Tories were bracing for a heavy defeat. Now they're going for the win http://t.co/6YvaFo3PBi
  • Mr. Lennon, just checked the fixtures. Wales have France at home, England play the French in Paris.

    The reverse is true of Ireland, but I expect both Wales and England to beat them fairly easily. I could be wrong, but the odds just look wrong to me.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,025
    Scott_P said:

    Here is something to cheer up the PB Kinnocks after PMQs...

    @TelePolitics: Blog: A year ago, the Tories were bracing for a heavy defeat. Now they're going for the win http://t.co/6YvaFo3PBi

    From that article:

    "To underline the theory, he points to the poll of key seats, published by Lord Ashcroft, which gave Labour a 15 point lead. “We reran it in the seats we hold,” he said, “but included the name of the sitting MP. We were ahead by 2 per cent.”

    Interesting, not least from a betting perspective.
  • Mr. Lennon, just checked the fixtures. Wales have France at home, England play the French in Paris.

    The reverse is true of Ireland, but I expect both Wales and England to beat them fairly easily. I could be wrong, but the odds just look wrong to me.

    I'm expecting the Welsh to win the Six Nations in 2014, just like I said they would in 2013.

    England are making sure they don't peak too soon for 2015.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782

    Mr. Lennon, just checked the fixtures. Wales have France at home, England play the French in Paris.

    The reverse is true of Ireland, but I expect both Wales and England to beat them fairly easily. I could be wrong, but the odds just look wrong to me.

    That would make some degree of sense at least then - although I don't follow Rugby closely enough to know how much difference home advantage makes? Clearly some, but enough to account for those odds differentials - probably not?
  • JonathanD said:

    Oh and for sensible PM questioning watch the heads of the select committee at the Liason Committee meetings.

    Some of the Select Committees are very good (Home Affairs, Public Accounts) - others, less so.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Scott_P said:

    Here is something to cheer up the PB Kinnocks after PMQs...

    @TelePolitics: Blog: A year ago, the Tories were bracing for a heavy defeat. Now they're going for the win http://t.co/6YvaFo3PBi

    A Hodges anecdote - should go down well with the Kinnochioans :)

    "He’d been particularly heartened by their most recent focus group, in which not a single member of the panel seemed aware of the Labour leader’s signature policy: “And then when we explained it to them, they all said the same thing. 'We don’t believe he’ll do it'”."
  • Mr. Lennon, I'm a lazy rugby follower. I'll watch the Six Nations and World Cups but not much else. If memory serves the Welsh and Irish are pretty good winning against one another away from home. The French actually have home disadvantage if they don't start well (the Parisian crowd enjoy booing their own side if they're not having a good game). Italy seem to have a fairly significant home advantage (I think they've beaten every team in the tournament at home at least once, with the exception of England).
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471
    Bobajob said:

    Leave Cam alone on drugs. Leave the Rev alone. Go on his record.
    Drugs and sex have no place in politics - irrelevant, common, and no worse than getting pissed.
    Let any PBer or hack who has never taken a drug cast the first stoned.

    There are several parts to this:

    1) The drugs he was taking are illegal.

    2) There are many jobs that cannot be performed well if you are suffering the effect of legal and/or illegal drugs. Whilst there is no evidence that he was in any way under the influence whilst working for the bank, he is open to such accusations. Certainly, if he had spent a little more time studying the figures instead of allegedly taking drugs, he may have put in a better performance in front of the committee.

    3) The drugs are just part of the scandal: it is the entire scenario that has enveloped Flowers, including his less-than-stellar history.

    4) His lifestyle (drugs, rent boys etc) leaves him open to coercion and/or blackmail, which is not a good position for a bank chairman.
  • The big question is the Italy v Scotland match, will there be an upset and the Scots beat Italy in Rome, or will they lose again like they did in 2012?
  • Times say the defence vote is going to be very very close.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Plato said:

    A Labour stalwart on Twitter yesterday was moaning about how pointless reading tweets was as it was all so predictable.

    McNulty didn't read the script today - must have been amazed when Cameron threw his running commentary on PMQs back at Miliband, unless he wanted to stick the boot in...

  • TGOHF said:

    A Hodges anecdote - should go down well with the Kinnochioans :)

    "He’d been particularly heartened by their most recent focus group, in which not a single member of the panel seemed aware of the Labour leader’s signature policy: “And then when we explained it to them, they all said the same thing. 'We don’t believe he’ll do it'”."

    Hmm, that is a curious anecdote. My sense was that the energy price freeze had gone down quite well with the general public. I know it's only a focus group but still, it's interesting to see both the level of ignorance about the policy and the doubts over whether Miliband would actually go ahead with it.

    And @JosiasJessop: good points on Paul Flowers' foolishness. I'd like to ignore his 'private' habits and lifestyle but, with the responsibilities and profile he had in his position, there isn't much that is truly private, is there? Questions about his fitness for work and any suggestions of blackmail potential are a big deal.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Cameron still needs to be careful over Spain's latest provocation.
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25021640

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    A rather facile comparison, but after reading this piece I now upgrade the number of seats that UKIP will win in the 2015 GE from 23 to 25. Now watch the PB Lab/Lib/Cons froth. :D
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    MikeK said:

    A rather facile comparison, but after reading this piece I now upgrade the number of seats that UKIP will win in the 2015 GE from 23 to 25. Now watch the PB Lab/Lib/Cons froth. :D
    Sounds like a good bet - what odds can be obtained from a bookmaker for this "bet" ?
  • MikeK said:

    A rather facile comparison, but after reading this piece I now upgrade the number of seats that UKIP will win in the 2015 GE from 23 to 25. Now watch the PB Lab/Lib/Cons froth. :D
    Can you name these 25 seats?
  • MikeK said:

    A rather facile comparison, but after reading this piece I now upgrade the number of seats that UKIP will win in the 2015 GE from 23 to 25. Now watch the PB Lab/Lib/Cons froth. :D
    No, I think they'll form an orderly queue to offer you bets......

  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    Bad few days for Labour. Shame though that we live in an unworldly world.
    We should all have more fun, live a little more, condemn a little less.
    Join the Caravan of Love.
  • Missed PMQs but seeing tim posted tweets from Michael White (!!) and a Lab MP to show how it went, I'm expecting Ed is doing as well as our own tax expert is here.

    Did you take my £500 bet offer? Evens that someone earning £35k does or does not pay 40% tax?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    Did you take my £500 bet offer? Evens that someone earning £35k does or does not pay 40% tax?

    Now, now Scrapheap - that's not actually a bet.
  • I think Lord Myners might have a point on the Co-op:

    “There must be some risk that the hedge funds who control the future of the Co-op Bank may say in the light of these developments that the Co-op Bank is in a much worse state than we thought it was. That the brand has been very fundamentally and seriously damaged, we either don’t want to go ahead with the deal, which I don’t think they’ll conclude, but they may conclude they want to rewrite the terms of the deal again,” said Lord Myners, a member of the former Labour government.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/10461119/Flowers-scandal-puts-1.5bn-Co-op-Bank-rescue-at-risk.html
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    edited November 2013
    To all at Dirty Dicks tonight, have a good time, I wish I were there.

    Especially as, I wanted to debut my new crocodile leather shoes to you all.

    They make my last pair of footwear look as plain and boring as a Methodist Minister
  • I think Lord Myners might have a point on the Co-op:

    “There must be some risk that the hedge funds who control the future of the Co-op Bank may say in the light of these developments that the Co-op Bank is in a much worse state than we thought it was. That the brand has been very fundamentally and seriously damaged, we either don’t want to go ahead with the deal, which I don’t think they’ll conclude, but they may conclude they want to rewrite the terms of the deal again,” said Lord Myners, a member of the former Labour government.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/10461119/Flowers-scandal-puts-1.5bn-Co-op-Bank-rescue-at-risk.html

    Especially if they lose the brand:

    Scandal hit Co-operative Bank could lose the right to call itself the 'Co-op' as a result of the revelations involving former chairman Paul Flowers, Business Secretary Vince Cable told the BBC today.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/ethical-coop-could-lose-name-over-paul-flowers-drug-scandal-8952019.html
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    I think Lord Myners might have a point on the Co-op:

    “There must be some risk that the hedge funds who control the future of the Co-op Bank may say in the light of these developments that the Co-op Bank is in a much worse state than we thought it was. That the brand has been very fundamentally and seriously damaged, we either don’t want to go ahead with the deal, which I don’t think they’ll conclude, but they may conclude they want to rewrite the terms of the deal again,” said Lord Myners, a member of the former Labour government.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/10461119/Flowers-scandal-puts-1.5bn-Co-op-Bank-rescue-at-risk.html

    I wonder how long Ms Lidbetter will last in post? If I was an investor, I'd be demanding an outsider chaired the board, not an institutionalised insider.

  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366

    Can I be Chairman of the CO-OP Bank, please? I could do with a part-time job that pays a ludicrous wage.

    I may be over-qualified as I know about the nine grand plus tax allowance (and I'll omit the drugs and rent boys).
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    I wonder how long Ms Lidbetter will last in post? If I was an investor, I'd be demanding an outsider chaired the board, not an institutionalised insider.

    If you were a member, you mean. She has taken over as Chair of the Group.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    I hope that tonight's great gathering at Dirty Dicks goes well tonight. I had thought I might have made it, but now have to wait for another time.
  • CD13 said:


    Can I be Chairman of the CO-OP Bank, please? I could do with a part-time job that pays a ludicrous wage.

    I may be over-qualified as I know about the nine grand plus tax allowance (and I'll omit the drugs and rent boys).

    But you'd have to be based in Manchester, It's only just dawned on me, Paul Flowers worked a few hundred yards down the road from me.

    I've probably been in the same, restaurants, bars and gay clubs as him.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724

    Oh dear, Dave's going to regret that Housemartins reference

    Paul Heaton ‏@PaulHeatonSolo 9m

    When I took over my pub in Salford, the first people I barred were Cameron and Osborne. That ban still stands.

    I really dislike musicians who are like this. It makes them seem very small minded. It's like when Morrissey got all upset about Cameron liking his stuff.

    Very childish.
  • Missed PMQs but seeing tim posted tweets from Michael White (!!) and a Lab MP to show how it went, I'm expecting Ed is doing as well as our own tax expert is here.

    Did you take my £500 bet offer? Evens that someone earning £35k does or does not pay 40% tax?

    Here's John Rentoul in the Indie:

    http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/pmqs-review-high-on-flowers-power-david-cameron-wipes-the-floor-with-ed-8952041.html
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Neil said:


    I wonder how long Ms Lidbetter will last in post? If I was an investor, I'd be demanding an outsider chaired the board, not an institutionalised insider.

    If you were a member, you mean. She has taken over as Chair of the Group.
    Investor in the bank ie the hedge funds shoring it up.

  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536

    Bobajob said:

    Leave Cam alone on drugs. Leave the Rev alone. Go on his record.
    Drugs and sex have no place in politics - irrelevant, common, and no worse than getting pissed.
    Let any PBer or hack who has never taken a drug cast the first stoned.

    There are several parts to this:

    1) The drugs he was taking are illegal.

    1) So is speeding, and it kills far more people than drug taking

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    I've probably been in the same, restaurants, bars and gay clubs as him.

    You've probably had to block him on grindr.
  • Neil said:


    I've probably been in the same, restaurants, bars and gay clubs as him.

    You've probably had to block him on grindr.
    I've never blocked anyone on Grindr.

    Though I may have blocked him on snapchat.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:


    I wonder how long Ms Lidbetter will last in post? If I was an investor, I'd be demanding an outsider chaired the board, not an institutionalised insider.

    If you were a member, you mean. She has taken over as Chair of the Group.
    Investor in the bank ie the hedge funds shoring it up.

    She's not on the board of the bank so why would they be concerned about her?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Neil said:


    I wonder how long Ms Lidbetter will last in post? If I was an investor, I'd be demanding an outsider chaired the board, not an institutionalised insider.

    If you were a member, you mean. She has taken over as Chair of the Group.
    Investor in the bank ie the hedge funds shoring it up.

    I should imagine the hedge funds will be wanting a higher % now for parting with their capital.

    Co op bank is reamed, fin, endeth.


  • CD13CD13 Posts: 6,366
    Well said, Mr BobaJob.

    I forgive tim for his small error on tax, I forgive the Rev too (even though he's a serial offender), and I even forgive Cameron for being born rich.

    I'm all heart.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    New Speccie cover is a doosie

    http://t.co/USxtO9QNdd
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    To all at Dirty Dicks tonight, have a good time, I wish I were there.

    Especially as, I wanted to debut my new crocodile leather shoes to you all.

    They make my last pair of footwear look as plain and boring as a Methodist Minister

    Why can't you come to DD's. I was looking forward to meeting you, and drinking together a toast to SeanT, with one of his freebies.
  • MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    Bobajob said:

    Bobajob said:

    Leave Cam alone on drugs. Leave the Rev alone. Go on his record.
    Drugs and sex have no place in politics - irrelevant, common, and no worse than getting pissed.
    Let any PBer or hack who has never taken a drug cast the first stoned.

    There are several parts to this:

    1) The drugs he was taking are illegal.

    1) So is speeding, and it kills far more people than drug taking

    And if he'd been caught speeding multiple times the end would be the same.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    MikeK said:

    A rather facile comparison, but after reading this piece I now upgrade the number of seats that UKIP will win in the 2015 GE from 23 to 25. Now watch the PB Lab/Lib/Cons froth. :D
    What odds do you want and how much ?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    MrJones said:

    Bobajob said:

    Bobajob said:

    Leave Cam alone on drugs. Leave the Rev alone. Go on his record.
    Drugs and sex have no place in politics - irrelevant, common, and no worse than getting pissed.
    Let any PBer or hack who has never taken a drug cast the first stoned.

    There are several parts to this:

    1) The drugs he was taking are illegal.

    1) So is speeding, and it kills far more people than drug taking

    And if he'd been caught speeding multiple times the end would be the same.
    Only if he'd gotten his wife to take some of the points for him.
  • TGOHF said:

    New Speccie cover is a doosie

    http://t.co/USxtO9QNdd

    Even better, the Flowers article is written by Melanie Philips! I can feel the low fat decaf lattes trembling in fury as we speak.....

    Meanwhile, I think Forsyth is right - Bercow did do a good job chairing PMQs this week:

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/james-forsyth/2013/11/john-bercow-presided-well-over-a-stormy-pmqs/
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Pulpstar said:

    MikeK said:

    A rather facile comparison, but after reading this piece I now upgrade the number of seats that UKIP will win in the 2015 GE from 23 to 25. Now watch the PB Lab/Lib/Cons froth. :D
    What odds do you want and how much ?
    Please, get to the back of the queue of people looking for odds or spreads on UKIP seats from MikeK!
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,963
    edited November 2013
    MikeK said:

    To all at Dirty Dicks tonight, have a good time, I wish I were there.

    Especially as, I wanted to debut my new crocodile leather shoes to you all.

    They make my last pair of footwear look as plain and boring as a Methodist Minister

    Why can't you come to DD's. I was looking forward to meeting you, and drinking together a toast to SeanT, with one of his freebies.
    I have a mediation hearing to attend today, in Leeds, which I have to be available for aIl day alas, I then have a CMC in Manchester to attend at 9am tomorrow.

    This PB Meet just happened to fall on the one week night in November I couldn't attend.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Good afternoon all. I watched PMQs today for the first time in ages. I had to agree with the tweet Tony McNulty sent out. Was the fate of a childrens' pre school playgroup in Chipping Norton, one of the wealthiest areas of the UK really the top priority for the Leader of the Opposition?

    Incidentally Coop Bank and the Cooperative Movement looks like it will be far more difficult for the Labour leadership than Falkirk.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    TGOHF said:

    New Speccie cover is a doosie

    http://t.co/USxtO9QNdd

    Is that a gay icon?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    MikeK said:

    To all at Dirty Dicks tonight, have a good time, I wish I were there.

    Especially as, I wanted to debut my new crocodile leather shoes to you all.

    They make my last pair of footwear look as plain and boring as a Methodist Minister

    Why can't you come to DD's. I was looking forward to meeting you, and drinking together a toast to SeanT, with one of his freebies.
    Are you on Cambourne and Redruth with Paddy Power at 40-1 Mike ? It is UKIP's (Baxtered) first seat they will gain.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471
    Bobajob said:

    Bobajob said:

    Leave Cam alone on drugs. Leave the Rev alone. Go on his record.
    Drugs and sex have no place in politics - irrelevant, common, and no worse than getting pissed.
    Let any PBer or hack who has never taken a drug cast the first stoned.

    There are several parts to this:

    1) The drugs he was taking are illegal.

    1) So is speeding, and it kills far more people than drug taking

    The figures around speeding are always controversial, but it looks as though you are wrong (besides it being an irrelevant point):

    "Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions."

    http://www.rospa.com/faqs/detail.aspx?faq=296

    "The number of male drug misuse deaths (involving illegal drugs) decreased by 9% from 1,192 in 2011 to 1,086 in 2012; female deaths decreased by 1% from 413 in 2011 to 410 in 2012."

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-health3/deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning/2012/stb---deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning-2012.html

    So the number of deaths from the misuse of illegal drugs is much higher than deaths from speeding, from those figures at least.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    From Mr Rentoul's piece

    "Every one of Miliband’s six questions was what is known in higher political analysis as cut off at the knees. We have finally found a full and independent public inquiry that he doesn’t support, said Cameron. When Miliband tried to talk about the closure of children’s centres - note that Labour doesn’t call them Sure Start centres any more: that never really caught on - Cameron accused him of spending the same money, from a hypothetical higher bank levy, 10 times over. “That isn’t a policy, it’s a night out with Reverend Flowers.” Not funny. Not fair. Totally effective."
  • Plato said:

    Oh dear, Dave's going to regret that Housemartins reference

    Paul Heaton ‏@PaulHeatonSolo 9m

    When I took over my pub in Salford, the first people I barred were Cameron and Osborne. That ban still stands.

    I really dislike musicians who are like this. It makes them seem very small minded. It's like when Morrissey got all upset about Cameron liking his stuff.

    Very childish.
    To be fair, I'd have been disappointed by Cameron liking Morrissey's output if I'd noticed the comment; dreary, pretentious nonsense.
  • Neil said:


    I wonder how long Ms Lidbetter will last in post? If I was an investor, I'd be demanding an outsider chaired the board, not an institutionalised insider.

    If you were a member, you mean. She has taken over as Chair of the Group.
    Maybe, maybe not. The potential investors in the bank may be in such a strong position that they can demand changes to the group board. As planned, the Co-Op Group would still own 30% of the bank. The quality and structure of governance there is therefore quite a consideration for those who'd own the other 70%. If push came to shove - and international financial investors aren't known for pulling their punches - what would the Co-Op do if the funds said they'd walk away unless there was change on its Group board?


  • The figures around speeding are always controversial, but it looks as though you are wrong (besides it being an irrelevant point):

    "Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions."

    http://www.rospa.com/faqs/detail.aspx?faq=296

    "The number of male drug misuse deaths (involving illegal drugs) decreased by 9% from 1,192 in 2011 to 1,086 in 2012; female deaths decreased by 1% from 413 in 2011 to 410 in 2012."

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-health3/deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning/2012/stb---deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning-2012.html

    So the number of deaths from the misuse of illegal drugs is much higher than deaths from speeding, from those figures at least.

    A few people have murdered others while high on drugs. I wonder if the poor souls are included here.

    Also, how many of the speeders were high at the time?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Neil said:


    I wonder how long Ms Lidbetter will last in post? If I was an investor, I'd be demanding an outsider chaired the board, not an institutionalised insider.

    If you were a member, you mean. She has taken over as Chair of the Group.
    Maybe, maybe not. The potential investors in the bank may be in such a strong position that they can demand changes to the group board. As planned, the Co-Op Group would still own 30% of the bank. The quality and structure of governance there is therefore quite a consideration for those who'd own the other 70%. If push came to shove - and international financial investors aren't known for pulling their punches - what would the Co-Op do if the funds said they'd walk away unless there was change on its Group board?
    The 30% ownership level was agreed last week - could be sub that by the time the deal is signed.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 43,471



    The figures around speeding are always controversial, but it looks as though you are wrong (besides it being an irrelevant point):

    "Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions."

    http://www.rospa.com/faqs/detail.aspx?faq=296

    "The number of male drug misuse deaths (involving illegal drugs) decreased by 9% from 1,192 in 2011 to 1,086 in 2012; female deaths decreased by 1% from 413 in 2011 to 410 in 2012."

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-health3/deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning/2012/stb---deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning-2012.html

    So the number of deaths from the misuse of illegal drugs is much higher than deaths from speeding, from those figures at least.

    A few people have murdered others while high on drugs. I wonder if the poor souls are included here.

    Also, how many of the speeders were high at the time?
    I don't think drug-related murders are included in those figures.

    We are veering very off-topic, but I've wavered over drug legalisation all my adult life. Sometimes I'm cautiously in favour of legalisation, other times I am not. And before anyone says, it doesn't depend on whether I'm on them... ;-)

    I have now settled on a position: I am not in favour of legalisation of any recreational drug, until such time as a usable roadside test is available for that drug.
  • BobajobBobajob Posts: 1,536
    @JJ

    I concede the point, although once you take into account dangerous/drunk driving the numbers are virtually the same. And 20,000 are seriously injured on the roads, many presumably from illegal driving. Rightwingers who bang on about drug use are often the same people who think doing 40 in town is acceptable (accept you are not one of them)
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    edited November 2013

    what would the Co-Op do if the funds said they'd walk away unless there was change on its Group board?

    Laugh?

    The bondholders effectively own the bank. It is the Coop Group that is stumping up the most hard cash to pump into the bank in return for an equity stake.
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    I can't stand Morrissey myself - but for an artist to get all huffy about someone of the *Wrong* political persuasion liking his stuff is wankerdom.

    Plato said:

    Oh dear, Dave's going to regret that Housemartins reference

    Paul Heaton ‏@PaulHeatonSolo 9m

    When I took over my pub in Salford, the first people I barred were Cameron and Osborne. That ban still stands.

    I really dislike musicians who are like this. It makes them seem very small minded. It's like when Morrissey got all upset about Cameron liking his stuff.

    Very childish.
    To be fair, I'd have been disappointed by Cameron liking Morrissey's output if I'd noticed the comment; dreary, pretentious nonsense.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Neil said:

    what would the Co-Op do if the funds said they'd walk away unless there was change on its Group board?

    Laugh?

    The bondholders effectively own the bank. It is the Coop Group that is stumping up the most hard cash to pump into the bank in return for an equity stake.
    Laugh ? When they owe a shed load to hostile funds.

    Maybe if they had Mr Flowers lifestyle they might...

  • Bobajob said:

    Bobajob said:

    Leave Cam alone on drugs. Leave the Rev alone. Go on his record.
    Drugs and sex have no place in politics - irrelevant, common, and no worse than getting pissed.
    Let any PBer or hack who has never taken a drug cast the first stoned.

    There are several parts to this:

    1) The drugs he was taking are illegal.

    1) So is speeding, and it kills far more people than drug taking

    The figures around speeding are always controversial, but it looks as though you are wrong (besides it being an irrelevant point):

    "Around 400 people a year are killed in crashes in which someone exceeds the speed limit or drives too fast for the conditions."

    http://www.rospa.com/faqs/detail.aspx?faq=296

    "The number of male drug misuse deaths (involving illegal drugs) decreased by 9% from 1,192 in 2011 to 1,086 in 2012; female deaths decreased by 1% from 413 in 2011 to 410 in 2012."

    http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/subnational-health3/deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning/2012/stb---deaths-related-to-drug-poisoning-2012.html

    So the number of deaths from the misuse of illegal drugs is much higher than deaths from speeding, from those figures at least.
    To be fair the person killed by a drug user misusing drugs is normally the drug user themselves.
    The person or people killed by a speeder often extends to passengers, other drivers, other cars passengers, cyclists, pedestrians and more.

    I have more sympathy than an innocent by-stander killed by reckless driving than for a druggie overdosing. So IMHO speeders are more dangerous than druggies.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    what would the Co-Op do if the funds said they'd walk away unless there was change on its Group board?

    Laugh?

    The bondholders effectively own the bank. It is the Coop Group that is stumping up the most hard cash to pump into the bank in return for an equity stake.
    Laugh ? When they owe a shed load to hostile funds.

    Maybe if they had Mr Flowers lifestyle they might...

    Let's hope Peston doesn't kick off another bank run.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    what would the Co-Op do if the funds said they'd walk away unless there was change on its Group board?

    Laugh?

    The bondholders effectively own the bank. It is the Coop Group that is stumping up the most hard cash to pump into the bank in return for an equity stake.
    Laugh ? When they owe a shed load to hostile funds.

    Maybe if they had Mr Flowers lifestyle they might...

    Let's hope Peston doesn't kick off another bank run.

    As Peston says

    "The alternative, you will remember, is takeover by the Bank of England, in a process called resolution, which would protect depositors savings, keep the bank's essential functions running smoothly and heap losses on the bond holders."

    The Co op group's 30% would be worth - well probably not much...

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...
  • TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    what would the Co-Op do if the funds said they'd walk away unless there was change on its Group board?

    Laugh?

    The bondholders effectively own the bank. It is the Coop Group that is stumping up the most hard cash to pump into the bank in return for an equity stake.
    Laugh ? When they owe a shed load to hostile funds.

    Maybe if they had Mr Flowers lifestyle they might...

    Let's hope Peston doesn't kick off another bank run.

    Peston's latest thoughts:

    So if you are a hedge fund that has agreed to invest £125m in the bank, you may feel a little bit queasy - because the shares you would be buying may not be worth as much as you thought they were worth, before the prime minister announced there would be a formal investigation.

    The hedge funds may therefore be thinking that they would like to renegotiate the terms of that £125m investment.

    Now my sources tell me that the hedge funds can't do that. I am told the hedge funds have given irrevocable undertakings to do the deal, and that what David Cameron said in the House of Commons would not trigger a material adverse change clause.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25021112
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    TGOHF said:


    Laugh ? When they owe a shed load to hostile funds.

    Maybe if they had Mr Flowers lifestyle they might...

    How much do they owe to these funds? The funds are the bank's bondholders. The bank's equity appears to have been wiped out. The equity owners (the Group) dont owe anyone anything else once their equity has been wiped out. The Group appears to be on the verge of pumping hundreds of millions in to the Bank to regain an equity stake. In this case isnt it the funds who are looking for the Group's money rather than the other way around like you suggest?
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    TGOHF said:


    The Co op group's 30% would be worth - well probably not much...

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...

    The Coop's 30% is costing them £400m+ of new money. They are pumping more money into this than the hedge funds. Yet you think the hedge funds have them by the short and curlies.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    TGOHF said:


    "The alternative ... would ... heap losses on the bond holders."

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...

    Try and remember who the bondholders are in this case.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411

    TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    what would the Co-Op do if the funds said they'd walk away unless there was change on its Group board?

    Laugh?

    The bondholders effectively own the bank. It is the Coop Group that is stumping up the most hard cash to pump into the bank in return for an equity stake.
    Laugh ? When they owe a shed load to hostile funds.

    Maybe if they had Mr Flowers lifestyle they might...

    Let's hope Peston doesn't kick off another bank run.

    Peston's latest thoughts:

    So if you are a hedge fund that has agreed to invest £125m in the bank, you may feel a little bit queasy - because the shares you would be buying may not be worth as much as you thought they were worth, before the prime minister announced there would be a formal investigation.

    The hedge funds may therefore be thinking that they would like to renegotiate the terms of that £125m investment.

    Now my sources tell me that the hedge funds can't do that. I am told the hedge funds have given irrevocable undertakings to do the deal, and that what David Cameron said in the House of Commons would not trigger a material adverse change clause.


    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25021112
    £125 million is chump change for Hedge Funds though isn't it ?
  • Neil said:

    TGOHF said:


    The Co op group's 30% would be worth - well probably not much...

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...

    The Coop's 30% is costing them £400m+ of new money. They are pumping more money into this than the hedge funds. Yet you think the hedge funds have them by the short and curlies.
    Peston (see down thread) says the hedge funds have given 'irrevocable undertakings'......but we'll see.....
  • Neil said:

    TGOHF said:


    "The alternative ... would ... heap losses on the bond holders."

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...

    Try and remember who the bondholders are in this case.
    Yes there's no guarantee that its the same hedge funds providing the new equity.
  • RichardNabaviRichardNabavi Posts: 3,413
    edited November 2013

    The hedge funds may therefore be thinking that they would like to renegotiate the terms of that £125m investment.

    Now my sources tell me that the hedge funds can't do that. I am told the hedge funds have given irrevocable undertakings to do the deal, and that what David Cameron said in the House of Commons would not trigger a material adverse change clause.

    Hmm, I wouldn't be too confident about the 'material adverse change' clause not being triggered. After all, it's not just the likelhood of an inquiry, but trouble on multiple fronts, and especially Uncle Vince's musings:

    Business Secretary Vince Cable told the BBC he was considering whether the bank was suitable to bear the name in the wake of revelations about Flowers’ alleged drug use and adult material on his computer.
    ...
    Use of the word Co-operative in a company name requires approval from the Secretary of State on change of ownership, which will happen to the Co-op Bank after its recapitalisation. It will leave the Co-op Group with only a rump 30% stake, and the rest held largely by hedge funds.


    http://www.standard.co.uk/business/business-news/coop-bank-may-be-stripped-of-name-as-paul-flowers-scandal-deepens-8951733.html

    On the other hand, the bondholders aren't exactly in a strong position either, since the alternative is quite possibly that they lose the lot.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:


    The Co op group's 30% would be worth - well probably not much...

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...

    The Coop's 30% is costing them £400m+ of new money. They are pumping more money into this than the hedge funds. Yet you think the hedge funds have them by the short and curlies.
    If the Co op group have the whip hand why do they not cut their losses, close the bank, shaft the bondholders and concentrate on funerals and shopping ?


  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,411
    edited November 2013
    Anyway back to the Coop - Funerals and shopping !
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:


    The Co op group's 30% would be worth - well probably not much...

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...

    The Coop's 30% is costing them £400m+ of new money. They are pumping more money into this than the hedge funds. Yet you think the hedge funds have them by the short and curlies.
    If the Co op group have the whip hand why do they not cut their losses, close the bank, shaft the bondholders and concentrate on funerals and shopping ?


    That would seem to be the sensible option, rather than chucking another £400M into the hole.
  • I thought the co-op's main business was propping up the Labour party?

    ::Innocent face::
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    edited November 2013
    TGOHF said:


    If the Co op group have the whip hand why do they not cut their losses, close the bank, shaft the bondholders and concentrate on funerals and shopping ?

    (1) Because there is value in this business, if they upgrade IT and rationalise the network it's a good investment and (2) Much of the investment (£100m+ I believe) is going to private bondholders who would be wiped out otherwise, the Group is an ethical business.

    Your take on what is happening seems to be a million miles from any reasonable view of corporate finance.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited November 2013
    Plato said:

    I can't stand Morrissey myself - but for an artist to get all huffy about someone of the *Wrong* political persuasion liking his stuff is wankerdom.

    Plato said:

    Oh dear, Dave's going to regret that Housemartins reference

    Paul Heaton ‏@PaulHeatonSolo 9m

    When I took over my pub in Salford, the first people I barred were Cameron and Osborne. That ban still stands.

    I really dislike musicians who are like this. It makes them seem very small minded. It's like when Morrissey got all upset about Cameron liking his stuff.

    Very childish.
    To be fair, I'd have been disappointed by Cameron liking Morrissey's output if I'd noticed the comment; dreary, pretentious nonsense.
    That would be fair enough if the songs are about a universal subject such as love, but when Cameron said he loved "The Eton Rifles" by The Jam, considering the song is written from the perspective of working class kids who had been fighting the posh boys from Eton, I think Paul Weller was entitled to raise an eyebrow.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:


    The Co op group's 30% would be worth - well probably not much...

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...

    The Coop's 30% is costing them £400m+ of new money. They are pumping more money into this than the hedge funds. Yet you think the hedge funds have them by the short and curlies.
    If the Co op group have the whip hand why do they not cut their losses, close the bank, shaft the bondholders and concentrate on funerals and shopping ?


    That would seem to be the sensible option, rather than chucking another £400M into the hole.
    I think the Co op management ( despite Neil's advice) have realised that owning a little of a lot is better than a lot of a little.



  • That would seem to be the sensible option, rather than chucking another £400M into the hole.

    Unless there are cross-guarantees (I don't know whether there are).
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:


    The Co op group's 30% would be worth - well probably not much...

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...

    The Coop's 30% is costing them £400m+ of new money. They are pumping more money into this than the hedge funds. Yet you think the hedge funds have them by the short and curlies.
    If the Co op group have the whip hand why do they not cut their losses, close the bank, shaft the bondholders and concentrate on funerals and shopping ?


    That would seem to be the sensible option, rather than chucking another £400M into the hole.
    I think the Co op management ( despite Neil's advice) have realised that owning a little of a lot is better than a lot of a little.

    Go on then - tell us all roughly how much you think the Coop Group owes the hedge funds?
  • The hedge funds may therefore be thinking that they would like to renegotiate the terms of that £125m investment.

    Now my sources tell me that the hedge funds can't do that. I am told the hedge funds have given irrevocable undertakings to do the deal, and that what David Cameron said in the House of Commons would not trigger a material adverse change clause.

    Hmm, I wouldn't be too confident about the 'material adverse change' clause not being triggered. After all, it's not just the likelhood of an inquiry, but trouble on multiple fronts, and especially Uncle Vince's musings
    Yes Uncle Vince's musing seemed potentially much more damaging than any inquiry; 'bad things happen, they're all gone, lessons have been learned' vs 'you've lost the brand'......

  • Pulpstar said:

    Anyway back to the Coop - Funerals and shopping !

    Funerals. What type of Flowers would you like with the coffin?
  • Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,069
    edited November 2013
    Something to do with Jack Dromey given the tweet exchange?? tim's also gone missing...

    Guido Fawkes‏@GuidoFawkes1m
    #StayTuned Prepare to drop your jaw.

    Harry Cole‏@MrHarryCole1m
    There's a big one coming.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:

    TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:


    The Co op group's 30% would be worth - well probably not much...

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...

    The Coop's 30% is costing them £400m+ of new money. They are pumping more money into this than the hedge funds. Yet you think the hedge funds have them by the short and curlies.
    If the Co op group have the whip hand why do they not cut their losses, close the bank, shaft the bondholders and concentrate on funerals and shopping ?


    That would seem to be the sensible option, rather than chucking another £400M into the hole.
    I think the Co op management ( despite Neil's advice) have realised that owning a little of a lot is better than a lot of a little.

    Go on then - tell us all roughly how much you think the Coop Group owes the hedge funds?
    No idea.

    But if this deal goes through the Co op will own 30% of a bank that will be floated.

    If it doesn't - no bank, no 30%.

    Now about this Jack Dromey story......

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Something to do with Jack Dromey given the tweet exchange?? tim's also gone missing...

    Guido Fawkes‏@GuidoFawkes1m
    #StayTuned Prepare to drop your jaw.

    Harry Cole‏@MrHarryCole1m
    There's a big one coming.

    Guido was taunting Mr Dromey that screencaps had been taken.

    Sounds like a deletion of an embarrassing tweet sent in error.

  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    TGOHF said:



    No idea.


    We knew that.
    TGOHF said:



    But if this deal goes through the Co op will own 30% of a bank that will be floated.

    If it doesn't - no bank, no 30%.

    What you dont seem to have grasped is that this stake is costing the group money. They dont get it for free. They have to pay for it.
  • TGOHF said:

    Something to do with Jack Dromey given the tweet exchange?? tim's also gone missing...

    Guido Fawkes‏@GuidoFawkes1m
    #StayTuned Prepare to drop your jaw.

    Harry Cole‏@MrHarryCole1m
    There's a big one coming.

    Guido was taunting Mr Dromey that screencaps had been taken.

    Sounds like a deletion of an embarrassing tweet sent in error.

    Ok guess time, naughty tweet re:

    5-1 Falkirk
    Evens McNulty smear
    Evens Drug smear of a tory
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:



    No idea.


    TGOHF said:



    But if this deal goes through the Co op will own 30% of a bank that will be floated.

    If it doesn't - no bank, no 30%.

    What you dont seem to have grasped is that this stake is costing the group money. They dont get it for free. They have to pay for it.
    And if they don't pay up what are they left with ? You think the Co op have a choice in all this ?


  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782

    TGOHF said:

    Neil said:

    TGOHF said:


    The Co op group's 30% would be worth - well probably not much...

    But Neil thinks they will laugh...

    The Coop's 30% is costing them £400m+ of new money. They are pumping more money into this than the hedge funds. Yet you think the hedge funds have them by the short and curlies.
    If the Co op group have the whip hand why do they not cut their losses, close the bank, shaft the bondholders and concentrate on funerals and shopping ?


    That would seem to be the sensible option, rather than chucking another £400M into the hole.
    Ahh... but you're forgetting - they are being advised by the financial genius that is Ed Balls - chucking £££ into black holes is his speciality no?
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    For those unsure whether Co op have a choice in all this...

    http://www.standard.co.uk/business/business-news/beleaguered-coop-bank-mulled-the-living-will-option-8705703.html

    "Co-op directors actively considered making their bank the first in Britain subject to a so-called “living will”, it emerged today.

    All banks have had to have such wills — known as “recovery and resolution plans” — in place to allow an orderly wind-up since the wake of the financial crisis.

    Had the Co-op proceeded with the plan, its bank would have closed after more than 140 years of trading. The fact that directors viewed the plan as a serious option demonstrates the scale of the crisis facing Britain’s only “ethical” bank as it grappled to plug the financial black hole quickly enough to satisfy its regulators.

    Bosses ultimately rejected such a move as potentially catastrophic for the Co-op’s brand. "

    Note the lack of laughter from the Co op for their "Plan B".

This discussion has been closed.