I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
Probably. But I was planning a sell and close out for a quick recreational profit on the first 3 digit fall. Which has happened. Ah well. Timing is everything. But I'm overweight cash and underweight equities so a stock market crash is in any case good news for me.
This thing about whether Starmer et al would offer Corbyn a Shadow Cabinet post is absolutely bizarre. The question about whether the leadership contenders would offer posts to the others is a valid question for seeing how the party would come together post contest, but Corbyn? Why should he want or demand it? What on earth are people claiming he has to offer the new leader going forward? Up until 2015 when has he ever shown evidence of being Shadow Cabinet material? And, for the cynic, when since? And if there’s one pretty consistent law in modern age U.K. politics, it’s that a new leader doesn’t want or need the old one hanging around like a bad smell.
I can't imagine Corbyn being over-excited about a shadow cabinet role, but I imagine he would enjoy some sort of chairmanship-style role - not necessarily party chairman - , as that's what he has long experience of in campaigning organisations, it would appear an appropriate level of prestige for an ex-leader without being on the front line, and the Left may want that as some sort of symbol of residual influence.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
I don't understand why the trans debate can't be resolved by saying "this is a medical issue and for medical experts to best judge on a case by case basis". Job done, move on.
I have no doubt some who say they are trans genuinely have gender dysphoria. I equally have no doubt some who say they are trans have mental health concerns. Saying that seems to be heretical though, but what is wrong with medical practitioners acting on a case by case basis?
I don't believe some who say they are trans are doing so to get "womens rights" but either way, let the medics deal with it and move on.
I quite agree with you. Provide the necessary medical care to those with this condition, let people change their official gender only after a medical diagnosis and provide gender-neutral spaces for those in transition. Job done.
But that is not what the activists want and what they want does impact on the rights of women. And they do seem obsessed with ignoring women’s concerns and shouting down those who express them. So one wonders what else is going on.
One of the things which is very clearly going on is that dominionist soi-disant Christian organisations in the US are funding anti-trans movements here in the UK (and elsewhere) using exactly the same arguments that were used against the gay rights movement.
The trans-pushback amongst some elements is being used as a wedge issue: Don’t think for a second that they’ll stop at trans people.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
Probably. But I was planning a sell and close out for a quick recreational profit on the first 3 digit fall. Which has happened. Ah well. Timing is everything. But I'm overweight cash and underweight equities so a stock market crash is in any case good news for me.
Three digit ? 100% is about as far down as it can go...
lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I'm not a FTSE day trader (The US presidential markets are quite enough to be worrying about) and am just going to stay in for the next 20 years or so, but do people simply dump stocks because they've gone down ?!
Well, yes, if words like "trend" and "momentum" exist in their conceptual landscape.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
You may not be her target audience but I possibly am as a voter. And the one thing I have got from the Labour leadership election is that Labour cannot be trusted to defend women’s rights.
I can get that sort of behaviour under Boris’s Tories. I’d like an alternative please.
Labour taking a Top Trumps position on women's rights does kinda boggle the mind....
Somewhat unnoticed in the anti-semitism scandal was the misogyny and bullying towards women. There is I feel an element of that with some of the more extreme trans activists: yet another group of men (by that I do not mean those who have transitioned) telling women that they know best what being a woman is and means. As if we have not had to put up with that sort of nonsense for centuries.
The shame of it is that there is an obvious compromise position available and a very real issue which does need attention - namely the lack of medical care for those with gender dysphoria. All lost when a small extremist group hijacks an issue and politicians are too scared to stand up to them for fear of not showing the necessary ideological purity.
Spreading into the courts?
At least one victim of violence by a transgender woman has been reprimanded in court for using male pronouns while describing the attack. Finding the defendant guilty, the judge refused the victim compensation, saying that when asked to refer to the defendant as ‘she’, the victim had done so with ‘bad grace’ or continued to use ‘he’.
It is nonsense. I am not a “cis” woman whatever that is. I am a woman.
This babyish belief that people have a right not to be offended is pathetic and dangerous. Respect is earned not imposed. Politeness is something freely given not demanded under pain of something or other.
A person with a penis is a man until they take steps to remove it. Womanhood is not a “feeling” but an objective reality. If a woman is attacked by a man then she has every right to use the pronoun “he” regardless of his feelings or whether he calls himself Wendy. In court when facts are important and determine outcomes the idea that reality should be ignored in order to spare someone’s feelings is quite absurd. It is happening because too many people are too terrified of being accused of some terrible thought crime or other.
lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I'm not a FTSE day trader (The US presidential markets are quite enough to be worrying about) and am just going to stay in for the next 20 years or so, but do people simply dump stocks because they've gone down ?!
Indeed they do. Especially if they start thinking about a SeanT-ish horror scenario with an entire summer of reduced economic activity as we all cower indoors with our stack of canned food.
After all, lots of people buy into shares because they are going up. It's simply the reverse.
I do wonder if Buttigieg and Klobuchar would be doing better if they didn’t have such totally unpronounceable names.
Names do often matter in history. Hitler’s surname would have been Shickelgruber had his father not suddenly returned to his mother when he was young, having been away for many years. It’s difficult to imagine thousands of Nazis chanting “Heil Shickelgruber”
I'm afraid you've confused Hitler with his father.
Hitler was christened Adolphus Hitler. He never had the surname Schicklgruber. However, his father, Alois, was illegitimate and originally had his mother's surname, which was Schicklgruber. She later married Johann Georg Hiedler, who is considered the most likely candidate to be Alois' father. At the age of 40 Alois applied to be legitimised in his step-father's name. For reasons that are unknown, Hiedler's name was entered in the register as Hitler. So, when Adolphus Hitler was born in 1889, his father's surname was Hitler (and his father was very definitely present throughout Adolf's childhood, although he had a very poor relationship with Adolf).
If Hitler had been illegitimate he may have ended up with the surname Pölzl, his mother's maiden name. But he was definitely not a Schicklgruber at any point. That is a myth.
If you're going to panic & charge toward the exit, make sure you're the first in the queue.
If you can manage that on a regular basis you'll be very rich indeed! Was only going to be a fun short on the futures but, still, I am slightly annoyed. Could have done it Friday but got caught up in MOTing my old Merc - always a drama.
lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I'm not a FTSE day trader (The US presidential markets are quite enough to be worrying about) and am just going to stay in for the next 20 years or so, but do people simply dump stocks because they've gone down ?!
I don't understand why the trans debate can't be resolved by saying "this is a medical issue and for medical experts to best judge on a case by case basis". Job done, move on.
I have no doubt some who say they are trans genuinely have gender dysphoria. I equally have no doubt some who say they are trans have mental health concerns. Saying that seems to be heretical though, but what is wrong with medical practitioners acting on a case by case basis?
I don't believe some who say they are trans are doing so to get "womens rights" but either way, let the medics deal with it and move on.
I quite agree with you. Provide the necessary medical care to those with this condition, let people change their official gender only after a medical diagnosis and provide gender-neutral spaces for those in transition. Job done.
But that is not what the activists want and what they want does impact on the rights of women. And they do seem obsessed with ignoring women’s concerns and shouting down those who express them. So one wonders what else is going on.
One of the things which is very clearly going on is that dominionist soi-disant Christian organisations in the US are funding anti-trans movements here in the UK (and elsewhere) using exactly the same arguments that were used against the gay rights movement.
The trans-pushback amongst some elements is being used as a wedge issue: Don’t think for a second that they’ll stop at trans people.
What a bizarre post. May I suggest that we consider arguments on their merits, or should I revise my view that the world is an oblate spheroid if I learn that dominionist US Christians have adopted the same claim as a "wedge issue"?
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
But if the bad end of the forecasts for Covid-19 come to pass, then maybe they’ll be lower demand for pharma products in future. Many of their target audience will have died. Might the outbreak also be distracting them from profitable areas of research?
I preferred SeanT’s last persona. This one is insufferably dull.
That’s because I’m not SeanT? He was insufferably drunk. I’m insufferably right. Which is what annoys you.
Moving on: there are countries which do have a grip on this. Singapore is one. That is reason for hope. This isn’t the Black Death.
The real damage will be economic. We’re obviously headed for recession. How bad will it be?
As someone sat in Singapore (ironically enough right now with an infectious respiratory illness), I have tried telling you this for days if not weeks. Instead you’ve spent the last week or two crying that millions were going to die.
That there will be a fairly sharp economic impact from the outbreak has been self evident to anyone in Asia since at least Golden Week. So that’s a month ago? Well done if you managed to position yourself conservatively during the last few weeks of market froth.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
But if the bad end of the forecasts for Covid-19 come to pass, then maybe they’ll be lower demand for pharma products in future. Many of their target audience will have died. Might the outbreak also be distracting them from profitable areas of research?
Indeed, there was no money in researching ebola or SARS, and tamiflu was basically bought at cost by various governments meaning there wasn't much money in that either.
Researching the disease of the day is rarely profitable and I think this could be one of the last times that privately owned pharma companies spend their money on the research. It may be up to government research labs next time.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
But if the bad end of the forecasts for Covid-19 come to pass, then maybe they’ll be lower demand for pharma products in future. Many of their target audience will have died. Might the outbreak also be distracting them from profitable areas of research?
Indeed, there was no money in researching ebola or SARS, and tamiflu was basically bought at cost by various governments meaning there wasn't much money in that either.
Researching the disease of the day is rarely profitable and I think this could be one of the last times that privately owned pharma companies spend their money on the research. It may be up to government research labs next time.
Gilead may already have something in its pipeline that was developed as a treatment for something else but which could work on Covid-19. It is being trialled in Wuhan. DYOR, however.
I have no doubt some who say they are trans genuinely have gender dysphoria. I equally have no doubt some who say they are trans have mental health concerns. Saying that seems to be heretical though, but what is wrong with medical practitioners acting on a case by case basis?
I don't believe some who say they are trans are doing so to get "womens rights" but either way, let the medics deal with it and move on.
I quite agree with you. Provide the necessary medical care to those with this condition, let people change their official gender only after a medical diagnosis and provide gender-neutral spaces for those in transition. Job done.
But that is not what the activists want and what they want does impact on the rights of women. And they do seem obsessed with ignoring women’s concerns and shouting down those who express them. So one wonders what else is going on.
One of the things which is very clearly going on is that dominionist soi-disant Christian organisations in the US are funding anti-trans movements here in the UK (and elsewhere) using exactly the same arguments that were used against the gay rights movement.
The trans-pushback amongst some elements is being used as a wedge issue: Don’t think for a second that they’ll stop at trans people.
That may well be so.
But I am not anti-trans. People who have gender dysphoria need proper medical attention. They are not getting it - or not fast enough - because this, much like other areas of mental health is woefully underfunded. So this issue should be addressed urgently.
But there is a conflict between trans rights ie the demand by men to have access to women’s spaces and effectively to eliminate women’s separate rights and women’s rights. That conflict can sensibly be resolved by saying that in order to change gender you need a medical diagnosis and take steps to transition. Women would have no issue with that. Women do have an issue with a man - without more - simply saying that he is now a woman and demanding access to women only spaces. It is a risk for women and makes a nonsense of what being a woman is.
Quite why the obvious compromise is being shunned by extreme trans activists is unclear. But there are plenty of trans women who do not share the views or demands of the noisy activists. And even they are being harassed and shut down and hounded. So there seem to be hidden agendas all over the place.
BTW I do share your concern that some extreme US Christian groups would like to attack gay rights. I strongly oppose this.
Anyway have to be off.
Light snow here btw. I will see if the corner shop is still selling ice cream for dogs.
Indeed, there was no money in researching ebola or SARS, and tamiflu was basically bought at cost by various governments meaning there wasn't much money in that either.
Researching the disease of the day is rarely profitable and I think this could be one of the last times that privately owned pharma companies spend their money on the research. It may be up to government research labs next time.
Indeed.
This review article is from 2005. We still don't have a good animal model for SARS-coronavirus...
Immunopathogenesis of coronavirus infections: implications for SARS https://www.nature.com/articles/nri1732 Key Points The severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which was first identified in 2003, is caused by a novel coronavirus: the SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV).
Many features of the infection indicate that an excessive, but perhaps 'normal', immune response contributes to SARS.
Several coronaviruses cause diseases that result in considerable morbidity and mortality in animals. Some of these diseases are also immune mediated and provide insights into the pathogenesis of SARS.
Feline infectious peritonitis virus (FIPV) causes a fatal, immune-mediated disease of felines. Macrophage infection, lymphocyte depletion and antibody-dependent disease enhancement are hallmarks of this disease.
Infection with the murine coronavirus murine hepatitis virus (MHV) strain JHM results in immune-mediated demyelination. Similar to SARS, macrophage activation is a key component in the pathogenic process.
Another strain of MHV, MHV-3, causes a fatal, fulminant hepatitis. MHV-3 infection of macrophages, with subsequent activation and induction of expression of a novel procoagulant, fibrinogen-like protein 2 (FGL2), is required for severe disease.
Chickens that are infected with avian infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) develop respiratory and renal disease. An excessive innate immune response contributes to the pathogenic process in these animals.
To develop effective therapies for SARS will require understanding of the contributions of direct injury by virus and of the host immune response to pathogenesis. This requires further studies of the interactions of SARS-CoV with its target cells and necessitates the development of an animal model that reproduces the pulmonary infection that is observed in infected humans...
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
But if the bad end of the forecasts for Covid-19 come to pass, then maybe they’ll be lower demand for pharma products in future. Many of their target audience will have died. Might the outbreak also be distracting them from profitable areas of research?
Indeed, there was no money in researching ebola or SARS, and tamiflu was basically bought at cost by various governments meaning there wasn't much money in that either.
Researching the disease of the day is rarely profitable and I think this could be one of the last times that privately owned pharma companies spend their money on the research. It may be up to government research labs next time.
Gilead may already have something in its pipeline that was developed as a treatment for something else but which could work on Covid-19. It is being trialled in Wuhan. DYOR, however.
Yes, and how much money will Gilead make from selling it to the Chinese government?
I quite agree with you. Provide the necessary medical care to those with this condition, let people change their official gender only after a medical diagnosis and provide gender-neutral spaces for those in transition. Job done.
But that is not what the activists want and what they want does impact on the rights of women. And they do seem obsessed with ignoring women’s concerns and shouting down those who express them. So one wonders what else is going on.
One of the things which is very clearly going on is that dominionist soi-disant Christian organisations in the US are funding anti-trans movements here in the UK (and elsewhere) using exactly the same arguments that were used against the gay rights movement.
The trans-pushback amongst some elements is being used as a wedge issue: Don’t think for a second that they’ll stop at trans people.
What a bizarre post. May I suggest that we consider arguments on their merits, or should I revise my view that the world is an oblate spheroid if I learn that dominionist US Christians have adopted the same claim as a "wedge issue"?
You don’t find it at all concerning that a bunch of people who would prefer to eliminate the entire LGBT spectrum from the face of the earth have chosen to fund this issue in the UK? I do.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
But if the bad end of the forecasts for Covid-19 come to pass, then maybe they’ll be lower demand for pharma products in future. Many of their target audience will have died. Might the outbreak also be distracting them from profitable areas of research?
Indeed, there was no money in researching ebola or SARS, and tamiflu was basically bought at cost by various governments meaning there wasn't much money in that either.
Researching the disease of the day is rarely profitable and I think this could be one of the last times that privately owned pharma companies spend their money on the research. It may be up to government research labs next time.
Gilead may already have something in its pipeline that was developed as a treatment for something else but which could work on Covid-19. It is being trialled in Wuhan. DYOR, however.
Yes, and how much money will Gilead make from selling it to the Chinese government?
Not as much as it might make elsewhere.
Very few, if any, pharma companies specifically develop products for the developing world. The important point for Gilead is it has the relevant IP already. It has spent nothing on development for Covid-19.
I quite agree with you. Provide the necessary medical care to those with this condition, let people change their official gender only after a medical diagnosis and provide gender-neutral spaces for those in transition. Job done.
But that is not what the activists want and what they want does impact on the rights of women. And they do seem obsessed with ignoring women’s concerns and shouting down those who express them. So one wonders what else is going on.
One of the things which is very clearly going on is that dominionist soi-disant Christian organisations in the US are funding anti-trans movements here in the UK (and elsewhere) using exactly the same arguments that were used against the gay rights movement.
The trans-pushback amongst some elements is being used as a wedge issue: Don’t think for a second that they’ll stop at trans people.
What a bizarre post. May I suggest that we consider arguments on their merits, or should I revise my view that the world is an oblate spheroid if I learn that dominionist US Christians have adopted the same claim as a "wedge issue"?
You don’t find it at all concerning that a bunch of people who would prefer to eliminate the entire LGBT spectrum from the face of the earth have chosen to fund this issue in the UK? I do.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I'm not a FTSE day trader (The US presidential markets are quite enough to be worrying about) and am just going to stay in for the next 20 years or so, but do people simply dump stocks because they've gone down ?!
Selling below the 10 month moving average and buying back above the 10 month moving average actually works very well, so yes people do and successfully.
Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.
Only if Labour want to form a government.
Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.
I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...
To be fair, next to IDS, virtually anyone did.
The Tories weren’t exactly spoilt for choice back then.
Funny how quickly these things can change though. Then very few people had heard of Cameron or Osborne who came to quickly dominate the party and British politics for more than a decade after Howard.
There's every chance a Labour version of Cameron and Osborne has been newly elected but we haven't cottoned on yet and after the next election they might come to the fore. It requires the leadership bringing through fresh blood though rather than returning to tired old faces (or batshit crazy loons like Burgon).
The next general election will be 13 years after Labour lost power, the same period in opposition for the Tories before Cameron won most seats but not a majority in 2010.
If as looks increasingly likely we go to No Trade Deal WTO+ terms in December and recession follows it is complacent from Tories to say Starmer could not get enough seats next time to become PM, even if he requires LD support as Cameron did in 2010 and falls short of a majority
On what basis are you making that judgement
We have just had opening positions from each side which are, naturally, a distance from each other
But if the bad end of the forecasts for Covid-19 come to pass, then maybe they’ll be lower demand for pharma products in future. Many of their target audience will have died. Might the outbreak also be distracting them from profitable areas of research?
Indeed, there was no money in researching ebola or SARS, and tamiflu was basically bought at cost by various governments meaning there wasn't much money in that either.
Researching the disease of the day is rarely profitable and I think this could be one of the last times that privately owned pharma companies spend their money on the research. It may be up to government research labs next time.
Gilead may already have something in its pipeline that was developed as a treatment for something else but which could work on Covid-19. It is being trialled in Wuhan. DYOR, however.
Yes, and how much money will Gilead make from selling it to the Chinese government?
Not as much as it might make elsewhere.
Very few, if any, pharma companies specifically develop products for the developing world. The important point for Gilead is it has the relevant IP already. It has spent nothing on development for Covid-19.
AstraZeneca is developing their new anaemia drug in China before anywhere else, which is something of a first. It won't be all that long before China is the world's largest pharmaceuticals market.
The point is perhaps that Pharmas are not spending much at all on developing new antibiotics or vaccines for diseases where there is not already a large pre-existing market. Which is a slightly different thing.
I hope it is quick and deep. Enough to see off Trump.
Yes. If there is a brutal Covid recession it's important that Trump and Johnson own it. Their watch.
Lol, you think a recession that is caused by a virus from China will land at the feet of the president who has railed against China and globalisation for the last four years? If anything it's a vindication of his policies of not being dependent on China.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
Now Big_G has hung up his seaboots, they might never recover.
I hope it is quick and deep. Enough to see off Trump.
Yes. If there is a brutal Covid recession it's important that Trump and Johnson own it. Their watch.
Lol, you think a recession that is caused by a virus from China will land at the feet of the president who has railed against China and globalisation for the last four years? If anything it's a vindication of his policies of not being dependent on China.
If enough voters are significantly worse off, that might not matter in the slightest.
Nandy has had a difficult fortnight. She’s shown a lot of political naivity and made some silly mistakes that have given me pause for thought. But she’s pondered hard on why Labour keeps losing and she’s strongest on anti-Semitism, so she gets my 1.
Starmer gets my 2. He has been solid and steady throughout, but has lit no fires. I trust him to assemble a strong shadow cabinet and to provide proper opposition. Boring might be quite a virtue by 2024, but he will never electrify the country or the Labour party.
I will not use my 3. To be fair, Long-Bailey has been better than I was expecting, but that is a very low bar. She is backed by all the wrong people and would keep them all in place. There is no way I could ever vote for that.
For deputy it’s Murray 1 and Allin-Khan 2. I like them both a lot, but Murray edges it because he has not pandered to anyone during the campaign and has spoken hard truths. Labour needs that. I won’t vote for Rayner, Butler or Burgon. Rayner has been a huge disappointment.
How does your vote 3 come into play anyway?
For your ballot paper above, it would require Starmer not to top the ballot. Then someone has to drop out. If it is Nandy, then the second round "2" vote is for Starmer. If it is RLB who goes in round one, then it is a straight fight between Starmer and Nandy. Nandy still gets your vote in round 2 (as she has not been eliminated to have her vote redistributed). I'm not sure how we get to a third round unless it is eg. Nandy 49.99%, Starmer 49.98%, a David Miliband write-in 0.03%?
I can't see a scenario where your third choice ever comes into play. So why make it?
To be fair to @SouthamObserver i voted for about 10 people in the London Mayoral election just so I could put Goldsmith last
Light snow here btw. I will see if the corner shop is still selling ice cream for dogs.
My poor pooch needs a treat. He's had terrible conjunctivitis this past week. Trying to smuggle his meds in to a deeply, deeply suspicious mutt is fun for all the family. And don't get me started on the wrestling with a well-oiled eel that is the four-times a day performance of trying to get his eye drops in....
I hope it is quick and deep. Enough to see off Trump.
Yes. If there is a brutal Covid recession it's important that Trump and Johnson own it. Their watch.
Lol, you think a recession that is caused by a virus from China will land at the feet of the president who has railed against China and globalisation for the last four years? If anything it's a vindication of his policies of not being dependent on China.
Exactly. If this hits the US or causes a recession, it vindicates everything Trump has been saying about economic dependence on China. Contrast with his opponents who think we should have open borders and not deal with illegal immigration.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
Hah! I bought £4k's worth last year to get the shareholder benefits - not my wisest move 😱
I hope it is quick and deep. Enough to see off Trump.
Yes. If there is a brutal Covid recession it's important that Trump and Johnson own it. Their watch.
Lol, you think a recession that is caused by a virus from China will land at the feet of the president who has railed against China and globalisation for the last four years? If anything it's a vindication of his policies of not being dependent on China.
If enough voters are significantly worse off, that might not matter in the slightest.
The "I was right" message will be extremely powerful. People who have lost their jobs will place their faith in the guy who pointed out the problem, not the people who wanted more China imports.
Logically I agree the situation is somewhat a vindication of Trump's agenda, however people are not logical. The Coronavirus has more downside than upside for Trump.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
There's no guarantee that the dividend will hold though, especially in the face of cruise ships being stuck in the ocean with no place to dock. I don't think that's going to put people in the mood to book cruises. There's a more than fair chance that this is going to cause a serious round of consolidation within the cruise and holidays sector rather than any immediate bounce back in the share price. A deadly, infectious virus is basically the worst case scenario for cruises.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
Yes, I bought some last year to get the extra spending money on my two QM2 crossings. They've been widely tipped as a long-term growth stock and the dividend is already attractive. I don't have them now but might buy in when it looks as if the corner is turned on the virus.
The trick is to find those stocks being driven down by the general selloff that actually wont be hit too badly. Pharma is an obvious example.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
There's no guarantee that the dividend will hold though, especially in the face of cruise ships being stuck in the ocean with no place to dock. I don't think that's going to put people in the mood to book cruises. There's a more than fair chance that this is going to cause a serious round of consolidation within the cruise and holidays sector rather than any immediate bounce back in the share price. A deadly, infectious virus is basically the worst case scenario for cruises.
Especially as the killer virus and the company share their target demographic.
Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.
Only if Labour want to form a government.
Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.
I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...
To be fair, next to IDS, virtually anyone did.
The Tories weren’t exactly spoilt for choice back then.
Funny how quickly these things can change though. Then very few people had heard of Cameron or Osborne who came to quickly dominate the party and British politics for more than a decade after Howard.
There's every chance a Labour version of Cameron and Osborne has been newly elected but we haven't cottoned on yet and after the next election they might come to the fore. It requires the leadership bringing through fresh blood though rather than returning to tired old faces (or batshit crazy loons like Burgon).
Cameron was tipped as the next big thing, though, in the Spectator in 2002. By Boris of all people.
You can usually spot a bit of potential or talent in the ranks.
Admittedly, I haven’t done this exercise on the current Labour crop.
Boris was certainly a Cameron supporter and subscriber to the modernisation agenda in the early days when editor of the Spectator. During the 2005 leadership election, while he was away on holiday, the Speccy seemed to be backing Ken Clarke, a position which he rapidly changed when he got back from wherever he'd been soaking up the sun.
I hope it is quick and deep. Enough to see off Trump.
Yes. If there is a brutal Covid recession it's important that Trump and Johnson own it. Their watch.
My fear is that in times of panic America will stick to nurse for fear of something worse.
Hope I am wrong but don't assume a serious pandemic and market panic will be the end of Trump.
If anything I think Trump will win bigger with a backdrop of a China caused recession. It plays right into his agenda of closed borders and antii-China rhetoric.
The DO NOTHING radical Dems say I'm a germaphobe because I wash my hands FIFTY times a day. Who looks the smart one now? Hey so how often do those crazy migrant loving Bernie Bros wash, do we reckon? Not much by the look of them !!
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
Now Big_G has hung up his seaboots, they might never recover.
It is fair to say my wife and I have spent quite a lot of money with Carnival over the last 12 years
I hope it is quick and deep. Enough to see off Trump.
Yes. If there is a brutal Covid recession it's important that Trump and Johnson own it. Their watch.
My fear is that in times of panic America will stick to nurse for fear of something worse.
Hope I am wrong but don't assume a serious pandemic and market panic will be the end of Trump.
If anything I think Trump will win bigger with a backdrop of a China caused recession. It plays right into his agenda of closed borders and antii-China rhetoric.
The more I look at this election, the more I cannot see how Trump loses (and as RCS2000 pointed out a while back, Trump really needs to carry the can when it all goes pop in 2022).
Lol, you think a recession that is caused by a virus from China will land at the feet of the president who has railed against China and globalisation for the last four years? If anything it's a vindication of his policies of not being dependent on China.
Voters - and especially Trump voters - are not the brightest.
Very few, if any, pharma companies specifically develop products for the developing world. The important point for Gilead is it has the relevant IP already. It has spent nothing on development for Covid-19.
References to "Gilead" are a bit disconcerting as I've just finished watching "The Handmaid's Tale" Series 2.
Things had moved on a bit and Gilead was trying to sell kids not drugs to the developing world.
I think the chain of events led to that dystopian society had (amongst many other features) something to do with a pandemic of a new virus destroying the ability to reproduce.
Some thoughts on the Labour leadership election, and why Nandy may do well. I'd estimate around 10% of members took part in the nominations. A large sample, if representative - but I don't think those who attend are representative - more on the left, more favourable towards Corbyn etc. Starmer did surprisingly well with these, which suggests to me that RLB has no chance. But we know little about the remaining 90%, most of whom will vote. It's not commented on enough here how many members really think it is time for a female leader. This is not a vote decider if there was a clear 'winner', but if you think two candidates are more or less equally worthy you may go for the woman. I think Starmer will win, but many have been really impressed by Nandy - potentially very appealing to the public, a good sense of humour, a realistic sense of the mess Labour is in, the potential to give BJ a hard time, and some years to grow into the role. If Starmer doesn't get 50% on the first ballot, and Nandy comes second, I think most of those who vote RLB may put Nandy as second preference - partly because of the woman thing, partly because of the northern thing, and partly because of her performances in the hustings, on TV etc. 2/1 on Starmer/Nandy/RLB looks a good bet; 20/1 on Nandy/Starmer/RLB is tempting.
If you're going to panic & charge toward the exit, make sure you're the first in the queue.
If you can manage that on a regular basis you'll be very rich indeed! Was only going to be a fun short on the futures but, still, I am slightly annoyed. Could have done it Friday but got caught up in MOTing my old Merc - always a drama.
What we have today is a steady selloff, without any of the rapid swings you see when events break suddenly and day traders and computer programs jump in to try and make money from the swings. This is a very different day from the trading ones when the 2008 crisis broke, or in the Brexit vote aftermath, or after 9/11 etc.
It does however make me more confident in suggesting that this will be a down week overall; the lack of upswings mean there aren't people seeing this as a buying opportunity.
If you look at past sustained market downturns, the first day or two represent a tremendous opportunity. Getting on trend a day or two late isn't the same as being the last one in or out.
I hope it is quick and deep. Enough to see off Trump.
Yes. If there is a brutal Covid recession it's important that Trump and Johnson own it. Their watch.
Lol, you think a recession that is caused by a virus from China will land at the feet of the president who has railed against China and globalisation for the last four years? If anything it's a vindication of his policies of not being dependent on China.
Agree on Trump. It may be trickier for Johnson given that his policies are about making it harder and more expensive to trade with our closest neighbours in the hope we might do more trade with countries such as, er, China, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia ...
Some thoughts on the Labour leadership election, and why Nandy may do well. I'd estimate around 10% of members took part in the nominations. A large sample, if representative - but I don't think those who attend are representative - more on the left, more favourable towards Corbyn etc. Starmer did surprisingly well with these, which suggests to me that RLB has no chance. But we know little about the remaining 90%, most of whom will vote. It's not commented on enough here how many members really think it is time for a female leader. This is not a vote decider if there was a clear 'winner', but if you think two candidates are more or less equally worthy you may go for the woman. I think Starmer will win, but many have been really impressed by Nandy - potentially very appealing to the public, a good sense of humour, a realistic sense of the mess Labour is in, the potential to give BJ a hard time, and some years to grow into the role. If Starmer doesn't get 50% on the first ballot, and Nandy comes second, I think most of those who vote RLB may put Nandy as second preference - partly because of the woman thing, partly because of the northern thing, and partly because of her performances in the hustings, on TV etc. 2/1 on Starmer/Nandy/RLB looks a good bet; 20/1 on Nandy/Starmer/RLB is tempting.
Remember the rictus smile fixed on David Miliband's face as he emerged knowing the result at the final count.
Some thoughts on the Labour leadership election, and why Nandy may do well. I'd estimate around 10% of members took part in the nominations. A large sample, if representative - but I don't think those who attend are representative - more on the left, more favourable towards Corbyn etc. Starmer did surprisingly well with these, which suggests to me that RLB has no chance. But we know little about the remaining 90%, most of whom will vote. It's not commented on enough here how many members really think it is time for a female leader. This is not a vote decider if there was a clear 'winner', but if you think two candidates are more or less equally worthy you may go for the woman. I think Starmer will win, but many have been really impressed by Nandy - potentially very appealing to the public, a good sense of humour, a realistic sense of the mess Labour is in, the potential to give BJ a hard time, and some years to grow into the role. If Starmer doesn't get 50% on the first ballot, and Nandy comes second, I think most of those who vote RLB may put Nandy as second preference - partly because of the woman thing, partly because of the northern thing, and partly because of her performances in the hustings, on TV etc. 2/1 on Starmer/Nandy/RLB looks a good bet; 20/1 on Nandy/Starmer/RLB is tempting.
Welcome to PB.
I agree Nandy is the best (if somewhat brave) choice, but fear you may be overestimating the electorate here.
It's true that Starmer will often have Labour's 'woman problem' thrown at him, and would be wise to put some women toward the top of his team.
Some thoughts on the Labour leadership election, and why Nandy may do well. I'd estimate around 10% of members took part in the nominations. A large sample, if representative - but I don't think those who attend are representative - more on the left, more favourable towards Corbyn etc. Starmer did surprisingly well with these, which suggests to me that RLB has no chance. But we know little about the remaining 90%, most of whom will vote. It's not commented on enough here how many members really think it is time for a female leader. This is not a vote decider if there was a clear 'winner', but if you think two candidates are more or less equally worthy you may go for the woman. I think Starmer will win, but many have been really impressed by Nandy - potentially very appealing to the public, a good sense of humour, a realistic sense of the mess Labour is in, the potential to give BJ a hard time, and some years to grow into the role. If Starmer doesn't get 50% on the first ballot, and Nandy comes second, I think most of those who vote RLB may put Nandy as second preference - partly because of the woman thing, partly because of the northern thing, and partly because of her performances in the hustings, on TV etc. 2/1 on Starmer/Nandy/RLB looks a good bet; 20/1 on Nandy/Starmer/RLB is tempting.
Welcome to PB.
I agree Nandy is the best (if somewhat brave) choice, but fear you may be overestimating the electorate here.
It's true that Starmer will often have Labour's 'woman problem' thrown at him, and would be wise to put some women toward the top of his team.
Nandy has won herself a top three job surely after this campaign.
I hope it is quick and deep. Enough to see off Trump.
Yes. If there is a brutal Covid recession it's important that Trump and Johnson own it. Their watch.
Lol, you think a recession that is caused by a virus from China will land at the feet of the president who has railed against China and globalisation for the last four years? If anything it's a vindication of his policies of not being dependent on China.
Agree on Trump. It may be trickier for Johnson given that his policies are about making it harder and more expensive to trade with our closest neighbours in the hope we might do more trade with countries such as, er, China, Japan, South Korea, Indonesia ...
After Luckyguy's crazy conspiracy theories at the weekend, I felt like floating the possibility that Covid19 is a government-inspired MI6 plot to provoke a global downturn in order to drown out the otherwise obvious damaging impact of Brexit.
Lol, you think a recession that is caused by a virus from China will land at the feet of the president who has railed against China and globalisation for the last four years? If anything it's a vindication of his policies of not being dependent on China.
Voters - and especially Trump voters - are not the brightest.
All Trump needs to do is keep calling it the Chinese virus.
Lol, you think a recession that is caused by a virus from China will land at the feet of the president who has railed against China and globalisation for the last four years? If anything it's a vindication of his policies of not being dependent on China.
Voters - and especially Trump voters - are not the brightest.
All Trump needs to do is keep calling it the Chinese virus.
It is a takeway virus. You need good healthy food, like American Chicken.
John Hopkins now has Italian cases up to 215, second only to Korea (833) outside China (77,150).
Bollocks does Iran have fewer than 215 if their death toll is anywhere near accurate. Unless the Iranians are murdering people and blaming it on COVID19
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
There's no guarantee that the dividend will hold though, especially in the face of cruise ships being stuck in the ocean with no place to dock. I don't think that's going to put people in the mood to book cruises. There's a more than fair chance that this is going to cause a serious round of consolidation within the cruise and holidays sector rather than any immediate bounce back in the share price. A deadly, infectious virus is basically the worst case scenario for cruises.
There won't be an immediate bounce back in the share price. On the contrary I think it will slide much further. Perhaps a buy in a year or two when confidence returns. The bounce back could then be big. Timing is everything. But one to watch if you are a patient long term investor.
Lol, you think a recession that is caused by a virus from China will land at the feet of the president who has railed against China and globalisation for the last four years? If anything it's a vindication of his policies of not being dependent on China.
Voters - and especially Trump voters - are not the brightest.
All Trump needs to do is keep calling it the Chinese virus.
"China plague" is what he will use. Virus is too medical and doesn't have enough fear in it, plague is much more emotive.
Nandy has had a difficult fortnight. She’s shown a lot of political naivity and made some silly mistakes that have given me pause for thought. But she’s pondered hard on why Labour keeps losing and she’s strongest on anti-Semitism, so she gets my 1.
Starmer gets my 2. He has been solid and steady throughout, but has lit no fires. I trust him to assemble a strong shadow cabinet and to provide proper opposition. Boring might be quite a virtue by 2024, but he will never electrify the country or the Labour party.
I will not use my 3. To be fair, Long-Bailey has been better than I was expecting, but that is a very low bar. She is backed by all the wrong people and would keep them all in place. There is no way I could ever vote for that.
For deputy it’s Murray 1 and Allin-Khan 2. I like them both a lot, but Murray edges it because he has not pandered to anyone during the campaign and has spoken hard truths. Labour needs that. I won’t vote for Rayner, Butler or Burgon. Rayner has been a huge disappointment.
How does your vote 3 come into play anyway?
For your ballot paper above, it would require Starmer not to top the ballot. Then someone has to drop out. If it is Nandy, then the second round "2" vote is for Starmer. If it is RLB who goes in round one, then it is a straight fight between Starmer and Nandy. Nandy still gets your vote in round 2 (as she has not been eliminated to have her vote redistributed). I'm not sure how we get to a third round unless it is eg. Nandy 49.99%, Starmer 49.98%, a David Miliband write-in 0.03%?
I can't see a scenario where your third choice ever comes into play. So why make it?
To be fair to @SouthamObserver i voted for about 10 people in the London Mayoral election just so I could put Goldsmith last
There won't be an immediate bounce back in the share price. On the contrary I think it will slide much further. Perhaps a buy in a year or two when confidence returns. The bounce back could then be big. Timing is everything. But one to watch if you are a patient long term investor.
That WH20 model of yours. Where do you have Texas?
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
In which case expect double dip. As the market first notices, a sharp downturn, then when the world doesn't end straight away, people will re-enter the market. Then a further slump when all the lag effects come into play and the longer term damage to the economy becomes clearer.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
There's no guarantee that the dividend will hold though, especially in the face of cruise ships being stuck in the ocean with no place to dock. I don't think that's going to put people in the mood to book cruises. There's a more than fair chance that this is going to cause a serious round of consolidation within the cruise and holidays sector rather than any immediate bounce back in the share price. A deadly, infectious virus is basically the worst case scenario for cruises.
There won't be an immediate bounce back in the share price. On the contrary I think it will slide much further. Perhaps a buy in a year or two when confidence returns. The bounce back could then be big. Timing is everything. But one to watch if you are a patient long term investor.
I think the question you need to ask yourself is whether they will exist in two years. I'd need to have a look at the lease and loan terms for their cruise liners but they will need a lot of flexibility in them. As I said, I'd expect a lot of consolidation in the sector.
John Hopkins now has Italian cases up to 215, second only to Korea (833) outside China (77,150).
I'm flying to Italy in 12 days time for a skiing holiday. I note that more than 3,000 people a year are killed on Italian roads (not counting pistes) so I'll be sure to look both ways.
Some thoughts on the Labour leadership election, and why Nandy may do well. I'd estimate around 10% of members took part in the nominations. A large sample, if representative - but I don't think those who attend are representative - more on the left, more favourable towards Corbyn etc. Starmer did surprisingly well with these, which suggests to me that RLB has no chance. But we know little about the remaining 90%, most of whom will vote. It's not commented on enough here how many members really think it is time for a female leader. This is not a vote decider if there was a clear 'winner', but if you think two candidates are more or less equally worthy you may go for the woman. I think Starmer will win, but many have been really impressed by Nandy - potentially very appealing to the public, a good sense of humour, a realistic sense of the mess Labour is in, the potential to give BJ a hard time, and some years to grow into the role. If Starmer doesn't get 50% on the first ballot, and Nandy comes second, I think most of those who vote RLB may put Nandy as second preference - partly because of the woman thing, partly because of the northern thing, and partly because of her performances in the hustings, on TV etc. 2/1 on Starmer/Nandy/RLB looks a good bet; 20/1 on Nandy/Starmer/RLB is tempting.
Agreed, Nandy has a "wildcard" aspect, although I doubt she'll win. This is the kind of politician who can pick up unexpected and off-radar pockets of support very rapidly.
As mentioned below, I think she actually has a certain amount in common with Rory Stewart. She has an unusual openness and a sort of original, questing curiosity that is unusual in politicians. Stewart is the same, with many female and male voters experiencing both in terms of sex appeal, although he can only return if Brexit is a disaster.
She will be a very handy foil for Starmer's precision and calm professionalism.
John Hopkins now has Italian cases up to 215, second only to Korea (833) outside China (77,150).
I'm flying to Italy in 12 days time for a skiing holiday. I note that more than 3,000 people a year are killed on Italian roads (not counting pistes) so I'll be sure to look both ways.
TFL introducing more 20mph zones in Central London from March.
On roads with lots of cyclists I find it hard to believe it is safer for the cyclists to be overtaking the cars on the inside which is what happens at that speed.
Labour is electing the Leader of the Opposition. That's not quite the same thing as Prime Minister.
Only if Labour want to form a government.
Just looking prime ministerial is not enough: ask Michael Howard. The new LotO needs to discredit Boris and the Tories first.
I'm not sure Michael Howard looked Prime Ministerial...
To be fair, next to IDS, virtually anyone did.
The Tories weren’t exactly spoilt for choice back then.
Funny how quickly these things can change though. Then very few people had heard of Cameron or Osborne who came to quickly dominate the party and British politics for more than a decade after Howard.
There's every chance a Labour version of Cameron and Osborne has been newly elected but we haven't cottoned on yet and after the next election they might come to the fore. It requires the leadership bringing through fresh blood though rather than returning to tired old faces (or batshit crazy loons like Burgon).
Cameron was tipped as the next big thing, though, in the Spectator in 2002. By Boris of all people.
You can usually spot a bit of potential or talent in the ranks.
Admittedly, I haven’t done this exercise on the current Labour crop.
Boris was certainly a Cameron supporter and subscriber to the modernisation agenda in the early days when editor of the Spectator. During the 2005 leadership election, while he was away on holiday, the Speccy seemed to be backing Ken Clarke, a position which he rapidly changed when he got back from wherever he'd been soaking up the sun.
Its interesting to think how history could be different had Clarke rather than Cameron gone through.
Potentially had Clarke become leader he could have defeated Brown like Cameron and if it had been a hung Parliament he'd have been able you think to work with Clegg too. But there definitely wouldn't have been a Brexit referendum from him and a UKIP schism would have been much, much greater.
More realistically it would have just ensured David Davis would have won the leadership election, although I'd have voted for Clarke.
Nandy has had a difficult fortnight. She’s shown a lot of political naivity and made some silly mistakes that have given me pause for thought. But she’s pondered hard on why Labour keeps losing and she’s strongest on anti-Semitism, so she gets my 1.
Starmer gets my 2. He has been solid and steady throughout, but has lit no fires. I trust him to assemble a strong shadow cabinet and to provide proper opposition. Boring might be quite a virtue by 2024, but he will never electrify the country or the Labour party.
I will not use my 3. To be fair, Long-Bailey has been better than I was expecting, but that is a very low bar. She is backed by all the wrong people and would keep them all in place. There is no way I could ever vote for that.
For deputy it’s Murray 1 and Allin-Khan 2. I like them both a lot, but Murray edges it because he has not pandered to anyone during the campaign and has spoken hard truths. Labour needs that. I won’t vote for Rayner, Butler or Burgon. Rayner has been a huge disappointment.
How does your vote 3 come into play anyway?
For your ballot paper above, it would require Starmer not to top the ballot. Then someone has to drop out. If it is Nandy, then the second round "2" vote is for Starmer. If it is RLB who goes in round one, then it is a straight fight between Starmer and Nandy. Nandy still gets your vote in round 2 (as she has not been eliminated to have her vote redistributed). I'm not sure how we get to a third round unless it is eg. Nandy 49.99%, Starmer 49.98%, a David Miliband write-in 0.03%?
I can't see a scenario where your third choice ever comes into play. So why make it?
To be fair to @SouthamObserver i voted for about 10 people in the London Mayoral election just so I could put Goldsmith last
Did Mummy tell you to do that?
Actually, unlikely as it may seem, that just might have counted, admittedly under somewhat bizarre circumstances. Best way of doing what you appear (understandably) to have wanted to do is to give a preference to everyone except your last. Then under no circumstances can you conceivably be considered to have supported them.
Some thoughts on the Labour leadership election, and why Nandy may do well. I'd estimate around 10% of members took part in the nominations. A large sample, if representative - but I don't think those who attend are representative - more on the left, more favourable towards Corbyn etc. Starmer did surprisingly well with these, which suggests to me that RLB has no chance. But we know little about the remaining 90%, most of whom will vote. It's not commented on enough here how many members really think it is time for a female leader. This is not a vote decider if there was a clear 'winner', but if you think two candidates are more or less equally worthy you may go for the woman. I think Starmer will win, but many have been really impressed by Nandy - potentially very appealing to the public, a good sense of humour, a realistic sense of the mess Labour is in, the potential to give BJ a hard time, and some years to grow into the role. If Starmer doesn't get 50% on the first ballot, and Nandy comes second, I think most of those who vote RLB may put Nandy as second preference - partly because of the woman thing, partly because of the northern thing, and partly because of her performances in the hustings, on TV etc. 2/1 on Starmer/Nandy/RLB looks a good bet; 20/1 on Nandy/Starmer/RLB is tempting.
Agreed, Nandy has a "wildcard" aspect, although I doubt she'll win.
As mentioned below, I think she actually has a certain amount in common with Rory Stewart. She has an unusual openness and a sort of original, questing curiosity by the standards of many politicians. Stewart is the same, with many voters experiencing this as sex appeal, although he can only return if Brexit is a disaster.
Will the assessment of any Brexit disaster be comparative with EU states?
This could be very muddled and difficult to assess with varying dependence on China by EU states (and UK), should SeadricT be anywhere near accurate.
I knew the Brexit food box would come in handy at some point.
Panic buying has stopped in Singapore now but it was pretty tedious for a few weeks. All Amazon prime grocery delivery slots were fully booked out unless you kept clicking on the hour, like you need to for Glastonbury tickets. Not a lot on the shelves in supermarkets also. Even the fancy expat butchers ran out of roasting joints one week, the disorganised bastards. Consequence being it could take 75 mins to get a Deliveroo rather than normal 15-20 if you dilly dallied in the evening. Oh it’s been so terrible I can’t begin to tell you!
If you want to get ahead in the game of stockpile, my top tip is to buy bog roll and then if you are so inclined, hand sanitiser and surgical masks. For some reason cauliflowers here also went MIA, as did instant noodles obvs. It’s quite hard to actually starve due to panic buying but you don’t wanna be resorting to a pail of water, unless you are nostalgic for that exotic backpacking trip.
You wouldn’t believe how excited we were at the weekend to get a next hour Amazon Prime slot delivery again. Crisis over. Now I just need this suspiciously lingering dry cough and breathlessness to pass...
John Hopkins now has Italian cases up to 215, second only to Korea (833) outside China (77,150).
I'm flying to Italy in 12 days time for a skiing holiday. I note that more than 3,000 people a year are killed on Italian roads (not counting pistes) so I'll be sure to look both ways.
TFL introducing more 20mph zones in Central London from March.
On roads with lots of cyclists I find it hard to believe it is safer for the cyclists to be overtaking the cars on the inside which is what happens at that speed.
I don't often get to London but I find it hard to believe there are many vehicles going faster than 20mph in Central London as it happens anyway.
There won't be an immediate bounce back in the share price. On the contrary I think it will slide much further. Perhaps a buy in a year or two when confidence returns. The bounce back could then be big. Timing is everything. But one to watch if you are a patient long term investor.
That WH20 model of yours. Where do you have Texas?
Hopefully between New Mexico, Oklahoma and Louisiana.
There won't be an immediate bounce back in the share price. On the contrary I think it will slide much further. Perhaps a buy in a year or two when confidence returns. The bounce back could then be big. Timing is everything. But one to watch if you are a patient long term investor.
That WH20 model of yours. Where do you have Texas?
100% Trump. RCP average: Trump is 4.2% above Sanders in Texas.
Some thoughts on the Labour leadership election, and why Nandy may do well. I'd estimate around 10% of members took part in the nominations. A large sample, if representative - but I don't think those who attend are representative - more on the left, more favourable towards Corbyn etc. Starmer did surprisingly well with these, which suggests to me that RLB has no chance. But we know little about the remaining 90%, most of whom will vote. It's not commented on enough here how many members really think it is time for a female leader. This is not a vote decider if there was a clear 'winner', but if you think two candidates are more or less equally worthy you may go for the woman. I think Starmer will win, but many have been really impressed by Nandy - potentially very appealing to the public, a good sense of humour, a realistic sense of the mess Labour is in, the potential to give BJ a hard time, and some years to grow into the role. If Starmer doesn't get 50% on the first ballot, and Nandy comes second, I think most of those who vote RLB may put Nandy as second preference - partly because of the woman thing, partly because of the northern thing, and partly because of her performances in the hustings, on TV etc. 2/1 on Starmer/Nandy/RLB looks a good bet; 20/1 on Nandy/Starmer/RLB is tempting.
An excellent first post and one I can whole-heartedly agree with!
Our nomination meeting had under 10% of members in attendance - and this was a record turnout for a CLP meeting.
I knew the Brexit food box would come in handy at some point.
Panic buying has stopped in Singapore now but it was pretty tedious for a few weeks. All Amazon prime grocery delivery slots were fully booked out unless you kept clicking on the hour, like you need to for Glastonbury tickets. Not a lot on the shelves in supermarkets also. Even the fancy expat butchers ran out of roasting joints one week, the disorganised bastards. Consequence being it could take 75 mins to get a Deliveroo rather than normal 15-20 if you dilly dallied in the evening. Oh it’s been so terrible I can’t begin to tell you!
If you want to get ahead in the game of stockpile, my top tip is to buy bog roll and then if you are so inclined, hand sanitiser and surgical masks. For some reason cauliflowers here also went MIA, as did instant noodles obvs. It’s quite hard to actually starve due to panic buying but you don’t wanna be resorting to a pail of water, unless you are nostalgic for that exotic backpacking trip.
You wouldn’t believe how excited we were at the weekend to get a next hour Amazon Prime slot delivery again. Crisis over. Now I just need this suspiciously lingering dry cough and breathlessness to pass...
British example. A relative works for a firm which sells the masks used by builders when dealing with particularly dusty jobs (Or ought to be used, anyway) They've sold about 6 months stock in one, and are now worried about replacing.
John Hopkins now has Italian cases up to 215, second only to Korea (833) outside China (77,150).
I'm flying to Italy in 12 days time for a skiing holiday. I note that more than 3,000 people a year are killed on Italian roads (not counting pistes) so I'll be sure to look both ways.
TFL introducing more 20mph zones in Central London from March.
On roads with lots of cyclists I find it hard to believe it is safer for the cyclists to be overtaking the cars on the inside which is what happens at that speed.
I don't often get to London but I find it hard to believe there are many vehicles going faster than 20mph in Central London as it happens anyway.
Hasn't that been top achievable speed since the days of the chariots?
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
There's no guarantee that the dividend will hold though, especially in the face of cruise ships being stuck in the ocean with no place to dock. I don't think that's going to put people in the mood to book cruises. There's a more than fair chance that this is going to cause a serious round of consolidation within the cruise and holidays sector rather than any immediate bounce back in the share price. A deadly, infectious virus is basically the worst case scenario for cruises.
There won't be an immediate bounce back in the share price. On the contrary I think it will slide much further. Perhaps a buy in a year or two when confidence returns. The bounce back could then be big. Timing is everything. But one to watch if you are a patient long term investor.
I think the question you need to ask yourself is whether they will exist in two years. I'd need to have a look at the lease and loan terms for their cruise liners but they will need a lot of flexibility in them. As I said, I'd expect a lot of consolidation in the sector.
They would be the consolidater. From memory they have a circa 70% share. They own Cunard, Princess, Costa and many others.
John Hopkins now has Italian cases up to 215, second only to Korea (833) outside China (77,150).
I'm flying to Italy in 12 days time for a skiing holiday. I note that more than 3,000 people a year are killed on Italian roads (not counting pistes) so I'll be sure to look both ways.
It looks like the entire Italian outbreak (hundreds and counting) stems from one guy going to the hospital with symptoms. Where he got it from remains a mystery.
FTSE crashing. Annoying because I had decided at the weekend to short it today.
I did on Friday, and topped up this morning. It's still a credible position - lots of people at work will find out that their shares are sinking when they get home, and there will be further selloffs this week.
I've got £12-£14k of cash ready to put into stocks and shares once they bottom out.
The main effect of this virus will be to trigger a recession.
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
OK - Well selling travel might be a good idea if the stocks aren't overdevalued.
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Carnival, the world leader in cruise ships, has been badly hit. 7% down today. 35% down over the last year. Currently yielding 5.3%, PER 8.6 and price further to fall. When this thing is over, this is a quality growth share. I'm watching when to buy. Not for a while yet. But DYOR.
There's no guarantee that the dividend will hold though, especially in the face of cruise ships being stuck in the ocean with no place to dock. I don't think that's going to put people in the mood to book cruises. There's a more than fair chance that this is going to cause a serious round of consolidation within the cruise and holidays sector rather than any immediate bounce back in the share price. A deadly, infectious virus is basically the worst case scenario for cruises.
There won't be an immediate bounce back in the share price. On the contrary I think it will slide much further. Perhaps a buy in a year or two when confidence returns. The bounce back could then be big. Timing is everything. But one to watch if you are a patient long term investor.
I think the question you need to ask yourself is whether they will exist in two years. I'd need to have a look at the lease and loan terms for their cruise liners but they will need a lot of flexibility in them. As I said, I'd expect a lot of consolidation in the sector.
They would be the consolidater. From memory they have a circa 70% share. They own Cunard, Princess, Costa and many others.
So long as they have deep pockets and plenty of cash/confidence. I know nothing about their business model but if they're in Thomas Cook style debt then they may not be the consolidater.
They would be the consolidater. From memory they have a circa 70% share. They own Cunard, Princess, Costa and many others.
Ok, think that through, how many new shares would be issues and how much would that dilute your own holding etc...
If I was looking at international travel, it would be flights. I haven't looked but I expect all of the major airlines are down today, but they have the ability to bounce back fairly easily.
But anyway, this isn't investing advice, it's just a general musing. Don't want to get in trouble...
Comments
Anyhow sell anything to do with travel and buy pharma.
The trans-pushback amongst some elements is being used as a wedge issue: Don’t think for a second that they’ll stop at trans people.
100% is about as far down as it can go...
Speaking of pharma, GSK is the only stock I hold outright.
Dividend forward yield is 5.58% right now and...
https://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/chinas-clover-partners-gsk-coronavirus-083005485.html
This babyish belief that people have a right not to be offended is pathetic and dangerous. Respect is earned not imposed. Politeness is something freely given not demanded under pain of something or other.
A person with a penis is a man until they take steps to remove it. Womanhood is not a “feeling” but an objective reality. If a woman is attacked by a man then she has every right to use the pronoun “he” regardless of his feelings or whether he calls himself Wendy. In court when facts are important and determine outcomes the idea that reality should be ignored in order to spare someone’s feelings is quite absurd. It is happening because too many people are too terrified of being accused of some terrible thought crime or other.
To coin a phrase, bollocks to that!
After all, lots of people buy into shares because they are going up. It's simply the reverse.
Hitler was christened Adolphus Hitler. He never had the surname Schicklgruber. However, his father, Alois, was illegitimate and originally had his mother's surname, which was Schicklgruber. She later married Johann Georg Hiedler, who is considered the most likely candidate to be Alois' father. At the age of 40 Alois applied to be legitimised in his step-father's name. For reasons that are unknown, Hiedler's name was entered in the register as Hitler. So, when Adolphus Hitler was born in 1889, his father's surname was Hitler (and his father was very definitely present throughout Adolf's childhood, although he had a very poor relationship with Adolf).
If Hitler had been illegitimate he may have ended up with the surname Pölzl, his mother's maiden name. But he was definitely not a Schicklgruber at any point. That is a myth.
https://twitter.com/RevStu/status/1231664785160318976?s=20
That there will be a fairly sharp economic impact from the outbreak has been self evident to anyone in Asia since at least Golden Week. So that’s a month ago? Well done if you managed to position yourself conservatively during the last few weeks of market froth.
Researching the disease of the day is rarely profitable and I think this could be one of the last times that privately owned pharma companies spend their money on the research. It may be up to government research labs next time.
But I am not anti-trans. People who have gender dysphoria need proper medical attention. They are not getting it - or not fast enough - because this, much like other areas of mental health is woefully underfunded. So this issue should be addressed urgently.
But there is a conflict between trans rights ie the demand by men to have access to women’s spaces and effectively to eliminate women’s separate rights and women’s rights. That conflict can sensibly be resolved by saying that in order to change gender you need a medical diagnosis and take steps to transition. Women would have no issue with that. Women do have an issue with a man - without more - simply saying that he is now a woman and demanding access to women only spaces. It is a risk for women and makes a nonsense of what being a woman is.
Quite why the obvious compromise is being shunned by extreme trans activists is unclear. But there are plenty of trans women who do not share the views or demands of the noisy activists. And even they are being harassed and shut down and hounded. So there seem to be hidden agendas all over the place.
BTW I do share your concern that some extreme US Christian groups would like to attack gay rights. I strongly oppose this.
Anyway have to be off.
Light snow here btw. I will see if the corner shop is still selling ice cream for dogs.
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/GILD?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAADANffZHRybBFnOTZMZANqogSHnUAsrzrjS83PNJPvcog6cO5aZ6Tmb1PrT9LLz_fOUvf3kkk7CRMWffbhPSv4rf89hRKa3ou-BKYuKh7i8xMDACsulgJiMXM0N5ORxB0zWbX4ei0FAB4016UtAHz_Z6NtgBp0XjQ-q78-l4F_T8
This review article is from 2005.
We still don't have a good animal model for SARS-coronavirus...
Immunopathogenesis of coronavirus infections: implications for SARS
https://www.nature.com/articles/nri1732
Key Points
The severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), which was first identified in 2003, is caused by a novel coronavirus: the SARS coronavirus (SARS-CoV).
Many features of the infection indicate that an excessive, but perhaps 'normal', immune response contributes to SARS.
Several coronaviruses cause diseases that result in considerable morbidity and mortality in animals. Some of these diseases are also immune mediated and provide insights into the pathogenesis of SARS.
Feline infectious peritonitis virus (FIPV) causes a fatal, immune-mediated disease of felines. Macrophage infection, lymphocyte depletion and antibody-dependent disease enhancement are hallmarks of this disease.
Infection with the murine coronavirus murine hepatitis virus (MHV) strain JHM results in immune-mediated demyelination. Similar to SARS, macrophage activation is a key component in the pathogenic process.
Another strain of MHV, MHV-3, causes a fatal, fulminant hepatitis. MHV-3 infection of macrophages, with subsequent activation and induction of expression of a novel procoagulant, fibrinogen-like protein 2 (FGL2), is required for severe disease.
Chickens that are infected with avian infectious bronchitis virus (IBV) develop respiratory and renal disease. An excessive innate immune response contributes to the pathogenic process in these animals.
To develop effective therapies for SARS will require understanding of the contributions of direct injury by virus and of the host immune response to pathogenesis. This requires further studies of the interactions of SARS-CoV with its target cells and necessitates the development of an animal model that reproduces the pulmonary infection that is observed in infected humans...
Very few, if any, pharma companies specifically develop products for the developing world. The important point for Gilead is it has the relevant IP already. It has spent nothing on development for Covid-19.
This recession started in China.
Both would have that political option.
Are this group funded from the US?
https://forwomen.scot
I’m on the fence.
We have just had opening positions from each side which are, naturally, a distance from each other
It won't be all that long before China is the world's largest pharmaceuticals market.
The point is perhaps that Pharmas are not spending much at all on developing new antibiotics or vaccines for diseases where there is not already a large pre-existing market. Which is a slightly different thing.
Hope I am wrong but don't assume a serious pandemic and market panic will be the end of Trump.
https://twitter.com/mailplus/status/1231887904777154561?s=21
The trick is to find those stocks being driven down by the general selloff that actually wont be hit too badly. Pharma is an obvious example.
Things had moved on a bit and Gilead was trying to sell kids not drugs to the developing world.
I think the chain of events led to that dystopian society had (amongst many other features) something to do with a pandemic of a new virus destroying the ability to reproduce.
It does however make me more confident in suggesting that this will be a down week overall; the lack of upswings mean there aren't people seeing this as a buying opportunity.
If you look at past sustained market downturns, the first day or two represent a tremendous opportunity. Getting on trend a day or two late isn't the same as being the last one in or out.
I agree Nandy is the best (if somewhat brave) choice, but fear you may be overestimating the electorate here.
It's true that Starmer will often have Labour's 'woman problem' thrown at him, and would be wise to put some women toward the top of his team.
After all, we're discussing a boycott, not a ban. Polanski has no right to a wide theatrical distribution of his film.
I knew the Brexit food box would come in handy at some point.
Shadow Home sec?
There won't be an immediate bounce back in the share price. On the contrary I think it will slide much further. Perhaps a buy in a year or two when confidence returns. The bounce back could then be big. Timing is everything. But one to watch if you are a patient long term investor.
As mentioned below, I think she actually has a certain amount in common with Rory Stewart. She has an unusual openness and a sort of original, questing curiosity that is unusual in politicians. Stewart is the same, with many female and male voters experiencing both in terms of sex appeal, although he can only return if Brexit is a disaster.
She will be a very handy foil for Starmer's precision and calm professionalism.
On roads with lots of cyclists I find it hard to believe it is safer for the cyclists to be overtaking the cars on the inside which is what happens at that speed.
Potentially had Clarke become leader he could have defeated Brown like Cameron and if it had been a hung Parliament he'd have been able you think to work with Clegg too. But there definitely wouldn't have been a Brexit referendum from him and a UKIP schism would have been much, much greater.
More realistically it would have just ensured David Davis would have won the leadership election, although I'd have voted for Clarke.
And Good morning (just) everyone!
Will the assessment of any Brexit disaster be comparative with EU states?
This could be very muddled and difficult to assess with varying dependence on China by EU states (and UK), should SeadricT be anywhere near accurate.
If you want to get ahead in the game of stockpile, my top tip is to buy bog roll and then if you are so inclined, hand sanitiser and surgical masks. For some reason cauliflowers here also went MIA, as did instant noodles obvs. It’s quite hard to actually starve due to panic buying but you don’t wanna be resorting to a pail of water, unless you are nostalgic for that exotic backpacking trip.
You wouldn’t believe how excited we were at the weekend to get a next hour Amazon Prime slot delivery again. Crisis over. Now I just need this suspiciously lingering dry cough and breathlessness to pass...
100% Trump. RCP average: Trump is 4.2% above Sanders in Texas.
Our nomination meeting had under 10% of members in attendance - and this was a record turnout for a CLP meeting.
If I was looking at international travel, it would be flights. I haven't looked but I expect all of the major airlines are down today, but they have the ability to bounce back fairly easily.
But anyway, this isn't investing advice, it's just a general musing. Don't want to get in trouble...
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/23/clyburn-to-endorse-biden-south-carolina-116986