politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Take the 33-1 that UKIP will win Cambourne and Redruth
PaddyPower has put up some more GE2015 single constituency markets including the Cornish seats of Cambourne Redruth which the Tories took off the Lib Dems in 2010.
Looking at that map, is there a local dilemma for the LibDems?
Use resources to win a seat back from the blues or to keep three adjacent seats yellow?
If (and they may not be) resources are limited, which action is most important, will the local parties agree with a dictat from on high issuing priorities and how do you not get caught doing a bit of each and failing in all directions?
Looking at the monthly average populus 2010 swing data, the only noticeable change since July is that the 2010 C-C is firming up from an average of 64% in July to 68% so far in December. There appears to be no other material movement.
First? And no chance surely, given how people revert to the three main parties when there's a "proper" election.
Still, as a trading bet...
I'm afraid there won't be much trading with the £2.51 Paddy Power allows you !
Not a betting man, but always astonished to see how little, regular PBers are allowed to bet.
Is this the norm with betting agencies - or just for those with a successful (and therefore risky) track record?
I have no idea, neither me nor Paddy knows whether or not I will be up or down with them come the GE as the amount of open bets with them is just over £500.
The Hopi Sen article is truly excellent. Hopi has the ability to take us through the process of paint drying - or in this case peeling - and make us enjoy and understand every step.
Hopi hasn't told us anything new or surprising. He has just revealed the truth in all its mundane simplicity.
OGH may have questions about Hopi's methodology but I think this misses the point. Hopi represents the elegance of simplicity and the wisdom of the sane.
Also rans come from nowhere to win a hypermarginal seat?
I can't think at the moment of any recent analogy.
There is no credible evidence that UKIP are on course to win even a single seat in 2015, and I'll eat my hat if this is it!
There is no recent analogy for a party coming from nowhere to be a steady 10-15%+ in the polls. Out of interest, what would you count as 'credible evidence'? I have my doubts as to whether UKIP will win a seat but local election results and the by-election in Eastleigh certainly suggest the possibility.
Also rans come from nowhere to win a hypermarginal seat?
I can't think at the moment of any recent analogy.
How recent? – There was Dr Richard Taylor, who stood as Independent Kidderminster Hospital and Health Concern candidate at the 2001 general election. - Taylor campaigned largely on a single issue, that of restoring the Accident & Emergency department of Kidderminster Hospital, which had been closed in 2000 due to cuts in the NHS.
Taylor won with a majority of 18,000, defeating the incumbent Labour MP and junior minister, David Lock.
" In many ways it is now a 4-way marginal ". No it isn't. One Nation Labour haven't got a chance in this part of the nation.
Labour werent far off the Tories here in the locals this year. Both were behind UKIP. The Lib Dems seem to have collapsed in this constituency and have no chance.
There are too many uncertainties in this one... because it's Cornish, the LD share is likely to be robust with less LD-Lab switchers than elsewhere (or will it?); much of the seat is "proper" urban/industrial Cornwall, i.e. high levels of poverty, low levels of education which has, in the past predicated a strong Lab vote in times of increased economic inequality (but will that vote go UKIP instead?); the southern half of the constituency has a good share of instinctively conservative well-off retiree/second-homers (but will that small-c conservatism translate into Con or UKIP); and it's an almost entirely white electorate but proud of being a liberal community (so is that UKIP or LD?)
In short, you could argue it all 4 ways. As the best proxy for "unpredictable" UKIP successes it's not a bad portfolio bet, perhaps, but I can't see that anyone can honestly claim to have a clue what colour this seat will be in 18 months time. And that's without even mentioning Mebyon.
Interesting that Scotland is where Labour have lost the most "supporters".
Brown bouncers ?
Scotland is not going to be great for Labour come GE night. I'm still wondering what happens if the Scots vote to go it alone in relation to the HoC position in May , 2015 ?
As with all long shot bets highlighted by certain posters on here, I went to back this without even bothering to undertake any research myself (expierence suggests just take their word for it) and it's a feeble 14/1 now :-(
There are too many uncertainties in this one... because it's Cornish, the LD share is likely to be robust with less LD-Lab switchers than elsewhere (or will it?); much of the seat is "proper" urban/industrial Cornwall, i.e. high levels of poverty, low levels of education which has, in the past predicated a strong Lab vote in times of increased economic inequality (but will that vote go UKIP instead?); the southern half of the constituency has a good share of instinctively conservative well-off retiree/second-homers (but will that small-c conservatism translate into Con or UKIP); and it's an almost entirely white electorate but proud of being a liberal community (so is that UKIP or LD?)
In short, you could argue it all 4 ways. As the best proxy for "unpredictable" UKIP successes it's not a bad portfolio bet, perhaps, but I can't see that anyone can honestly claim to have a clue what colour this seat will be in 18 months time. And that's without even mentioning Mebyon.
If there is genuinely no idea then all the parties default position is 3-1 (Not saying this is the case, but it is the starting point for a 4 horse race). Obviously 33/40-1 is the value.
I suspect this seat will turn out to be a good value loser for UKIP - Probably come 2nd.
" In many ways it is now a 4-way marginal ". No it isn't. One Nation Labour haven't got a chance in this part of the nation.
Labour werent far off the Tories here in the locals this year. Both were behind UKIP. The Lib Dems seem to have collapsed in this constituency and have no chance.
Neil
I'm given to understand that Labour have an edge in the ground game too.
First? And no chance surely, given how people revert to the three main parties when there's a "proper" election.
Still, as a trading bet...
But will they this time? We've moved from 3-party politics to 4 parties and basic assumptions might not stand up.
We don't even know if basic assumptions will stand the stress test of coalition government.
Do we know if we are in 4 party politics because we are in a coalition and one opposition party is not enough (sorry Greens, you seem to have been usurped here) or because UKIP resonates?
We don't know the Scotland situation. Will the independence referendum change votes if it is won, or will it change votes if it is lost because it has highlighted the West Lothian question to the general English population?
Do we know how much of Labour 2010 was a hang on to the experienced Mr Brown vote in these turbulent times? There was some in there, I believe.
Do we know how attitudes and polls are reacting to the unusual lack of 'election date speculation' in the media, which was rampant before the fixed term act, and maybe would have hardened poll responses as the prospect of election was ramped up.
For 2015 there are more major imponderables than I can recollect for many and election, making polls and predictions far less certain and less comparable to past situations than for many a year.
If UKIP do win this seat then the Conservatives are going to be in some trouble come GE night - SO some of my Labour/NOM bets should definitely come in...
Mr. Pulpstar, I've long been of the view that if the Scots vote for independence that'll be great for the SNP north of the border and the Conservatives south of it.
Of course, Angus Robertson, SNP MP, has called for the 2015 election to be postponed in the event of a Yes vote.
" In many ways it is now a 4-way marginal ". No it isn't. One Nation Labour haven't got a chance in this part of the nation.
Labour werent far off the Tories here in the locals this year. Both were behind UKIP. The Lib Dems seem to have collapsed in this constituency and have no chance.
Neil
I'm given to understand that Labour have an edge in the ground game too.
All that hard work on the ground is bound to pay off for them in the end, Avery
I see this as a Tory hold but 40/1 on UKIP and 8/1 on Labour were both decent enough prices if the Lib Dems are really out of it (and they seem to be). If UKIP has come in a lot and Labour drifted then the value is probably with Labour now.
Mr. Pulpstar, I've long been of the view that if the Scots vote for independence that'll be great for the SNP north of the border and the Conservatives south of it.
Of course, Angus Robertson, SNP MP, has called for the 2015 election to be postponed in the event of a Yes vote.
The one thing that it does not increase the probability of however is CON majority.
I would say it make a Conservative Minority Gov't far more likely however.
" In many ways it is now a 4-way marginal ". No it isn't. One Nation Labour haven't got a chance in this part of the nation.
Labour werent far off the Tories here in the locals this year. Both were behind UKIP. The Lib Dems seem to have collapsed in this constituency and have no chance.
Neil
I'm given to understand that Labour have an edge in the ground game too.
All that hard work on the ground is bound to pay off for them in the end, Avery
I see this as a Tory hold but 40/1 on UKIP and 8/1 on Labour were both decent enough prices if the Lib Dems are really out of it (and they seem to be). If UKIP has come in a lot and Labour drifted then the value is probably with Labour now.
We need a local constituency view. Politics tends to get more local the further west you go. Most of the voters in the constituency probably regard the Tamar with the same degree of suspicion that Farage regards the Channel.
Someone will have eaten someone else's lobster and that will be the deciding factor.
There are too many uncertainties in this one... because it's Cornish, the LD share is likely to be robust with less LD-Lab switchers than elsewhere (or will it?); much of the seat is "proper" urban/industrial Cornwall, i.e. high levels of poverty, low levels of education which has, in the past predicated a strong Lab vote in times of increased economic inequality (but will that vote go UKIP instead?); the southern half of the constituency has a good share of instinctively conservative well-off retiree/second-homers (but will that small-c conservatism translate into Con or UKIP); and it's an almost entirely white electorate but proud of being a liberal community (so is that UKIP or LD?)
In short, you could argue it all 4 ways. As the best proxy for "unpredictable" UKIP successes it's not a bad portfolio bet, perhaps, but I can't see that anyone can honestly claim to have a clue what colour this seat will be in 18 months time. And that's without even mentioning Mebyon.
If there is genuinely no idea then all the parties default position is 3-1 (Not saying this is the case, but it is the starting point for a 4 horse race). Obviously 33/40-1 is the value.
I suspect this seat will turn out to be a good value loser for UKIP - Probably come 2nd.
But you never know....
Paying some regard to previous form, you'd put LD and Con well in the lead, but it's hard to know how far. Picking nice random numbers based on instinct, anecdote, and the entrails of the still-warm chicken on the desk next to me, I'd say that the chance of neither LD nor Con is at least a fifth, so backing Lab and UKIP at current prices seems worthwhile. There's certainly a very plausible scenario for this being an area where the Con vote melts away to UKIP, the LD vote generally collapses with some Lab benefit, and Lab win the seat with <30%.
" In many ways it is now a 4-way marginal ". No it isn't. One Nation Labour haven't got a chance in this part of the nation.
Labour werent far off the Tories here in the locals this year. Both were behind UKIP. The Lib Dems seem to have collapsed in this constituency and have no chance.
Neil
I'm given to understand that Labour have an edge in the ground game too.
I think it will be very close between Conservative and Labour with UKIP a strong third and the Lib Dems in fourth but that may not be typical of what could be a fascinating part of the country at the next election.
" In many ways it is now a 4-way marginal ". No it isn't. One Nation Labour haven't got a chance in this part of the nation.
Labour werent far off the Tories here in the locals this year. Both were behind UKIP. The Lib Dems seem to have collapsed in this constituency and have no chance.
The LDs are being stupidly underestimated at present. They have been an integral part of a government that is looking better by the day and will probably be viewed by political historians as exemplary or even great. Labour is a bubble which is about to burst in a revolting fashion.
Paying some regard to previous form, you'd put LD and Con well in the lead
The LDs couldnt even muster candidates for 2/3s of the wards in the constituency in the locals this year. I cant believe they're going to prioritise retaking this seat over holding on to the ones they still hold in Cornwall.
" In many ways it is now a 4-way marginal ". No it isn't. One Nation Labour haven't got a chance in this part of the nation.
Labour werent far off the Tories here in the locals this year. Both were behind UKIP. The Lib Dems seem to have collapsed in this constituency and have no chance.
The LDs are being stupidly underestimated at present. They have been an integral part of a government that is looking better by the day and will probably be viewed by political historians as exemplary or even great. Labour is a bubble which is about to burst in a revolting fashion.
No. Seats that Liberal Democrats HOLD are definitely not underestimated by people on here. That 0.2% gap btween CON and LD here is critical.
There are too many uncertainties in this one... because it's Cornish, the LD share is likely to be robust with less LD-Lab switchers than elsewhere (or will it?); much of the seat is "proper" urban/industrial Cornwall, i.e. high levels of poverty, low levels of education which has, in the past predicated a strong Lab vote in times of increased economic inequality (but will that vote go UKIP instead?); the southern half of the constituency has a good share of instinctively conservative well-off retiree/second-homers (but will that small-c conservatism translate into Con or UKIP); and it's an almost entirely white electorate but proud of being a liberal community (so is that UKIP or LD?)
In short, you could argue it all 4 ways. As the best proxy for "unpredictable" UKIP successes it's not a bad portfolio bet, perhaps, but I can't see that anyone can honestly claim to have a clue what colour this seat will be in 18 months time. And that's without even mentioning Mebyon.
"In short, you could argue it all 4 ways."
... if that is even remotely true, and one of the four options is 33/1 then it is a fantastic bet
Also rans come from nowhere to win a hypermarginal seat?
I can't think at the moment of any recent analogy.
There is no credible evidence that UKIP are on course to win even a single seat in 2015, and I'll eat my hat if this is it!
There is no recent analogy for a party coming from nowhere to be a steady 10-15%+ in the polls. Out of interest, what would you count as 'credible evidence'? I have my doubts as to whether UKIP will win a seat but local election results and the by-election in Eastleigh certainly suggest the possibility.
An evenly-spread 15% gets you nothing under FPTP, and I'll also eat my hat if UKIP get anywhere near that in 2015.
Credible evidence? Well a couple of by-election wins would be a start. The SDP won 2 in 1981/2, including one with 50% of the vote. Come 1983 how many seats did they win?
1 of the by-election seats was held. (doesn't look like UKIP are going to have a by-election win to defend) 4 popular defectors held on. (UKIP won't have this as an option) 1 seat was gained. (the Liberals essentially handed it to them on a plate. Again, no gift-horses on the horizon for UKIP)
Paying some regard to previous form, you'd put LD and Con well in the lead
The LDs couldnt even muster candidates for 2/3s of the wards in the constituency in the locals this year. I cant believe they're going to prioritise retaking this seat over holding on to the ones they still hold in Cornwall.
In Cornwall, I wouldn't read a huge amount into standing candidates. Some of the Independents are in effect allied with either the Conservative or the Liberal Democrat groups and in any case it's incredibly hard to defeat a well-known local entrenched Councillor anywhere.
Looking at the seats, I think the LDs will hold North Cornwall and the Conservatives will probably hold SE Cornwall but none of the other seats is easy to call. Oddly enough, I could imagine the LDs winning St Austell and losing St Ives but it's far from clear.
" In many ways it is now a 4-way marginal ". No it isn't. One Nation Labour haven't got a chance in this part of the nation.
Labour werent far off the Tories here in the locals this year. Both were behind UKIP. The Lib Dems seem to have collapsed in this constituency and have no chance.
Neil
I'm given to understand that Labour have an edge in the ground game too.
All that hard work on the ground is bound to pay off for them in the end, Avery
I see this as a Tory hold but 40/1 on UKIP and 8/1 on Labour were both decent enough prices if the Lib Dems are really out of it (and they seem to be). If UKIP has come in a lot and Labour drifted then the value is probably with Labour now.
We need a local constituency view. Politics tends to get more local the further west you go. Most of the voters in the constituency probably regard the Tamar with the same degree of suspicion that Farage regards the Channel.
Someone will have eaten someone else's lobster and that will be the deciding factor.
The problem is that it's a very diverse constituency. Even some of the wards are - a good friend of mine is a parish priest in the constituency and his benefice contains the outskirts of a seriously deprived ex-mining town and some pretty pleasant holiday villages. You'd get a totally different read in (say) Camborne versus Gweek, plus the anti-London sentiment makes it hard to get much of a straight answer in favour of any of the parties. That NOTA sentiment played in favour of the LDs until 2010, when it was a straight Lab-Con swing that decided the outcome. The only way to get any sense of what happens now would be pretty detailed groundwork right across the constituency (the dozen or so people I know who live there aren't enough to give any sense of it).
"Eating someone else's lobster" is a euphemism I'm not familiar with. Intriguing.
Interesting seat. I notice there wasn't much evidence of tactical voting to keep out the Tory - in 2010 the Labour vote was down 12.4% and the LD vote went up only 1.6%
The Chart on the next page (p11) is worth a look to. The number of hours worked in the UK has increased by 17.6m in a year and is now over 30m more than it was in 2008. This is one of the reasons (along with substantial increases in personal allowances) why the figures showing average wage increases are a bit misleading.
Also rans come from nowhere to win a hypermarginal seat?
I can't think at the moment of any recent analogy.
There is no credible evidence that UKIP are on course to win even a single seat in 2015, and I'll eat my hat if this is it!
There is no recent analogy for a party coming from nowhere to be a steady 10-15%+ in the polls. Out of interest, what would you count as 'credible evidence'? I have my doubts as to whether UKIP will win a seat but local election results and the by-election in Eastleigh certainly suggest the possibility.
An evenly-spread 15% gets you nothing under FPTP, and I'll also eat my hat if UKIP get anywhere near that in 2015.
Credible evidence? Well a couple of by-election wins would be a start. The SDP won 2 in 1981/2, including one with 50% of the vote. Come 1983 how many seats did they win?
1 of the by-election seats was held. (doesn't look like UKIP are going to have a by-election win to defend) 4 popular defectors held on. (UKIP won't have this as an option) 1 seat was gained. (the Liberals essentially handed it to them on a plate. Again, no gift-horses on the horizon for UKIP)
Oddly enough, I could imagine the LDs winning St Austell and losing St Ives but it's far from clear.
I think Andrew George is still pretty popular, perhaps due to opposing Coalition policies on a number of issues that are important to potential Labour voters. I can't see a LD-Con swing, and it's likely that Lab supporters will feel able to vote for him in order to insure against the risk of a Con gain (actually, I'll probably be voting there in 2015, thinking about it, and that's the approach I expect to take despite a general loathing for the LDs).
Just looking through more detail of pay growth. Labour are in big trouble if they keep pushing it here. The signs are there for a significant recovery in pay growth in for the ca. 25m private sector workers out there over the next few months. The sector dragging down the headline rate of pay growth was financial services and construction had poor YoY growth too. The rest of the economy has seen pay growth close to 2% YoY.
The vast majority of UK workers are going to see their pay rise faster than inflation next year, and while bankers and builders could struggle I don't think many will lose too much sleep over it.
If a Labour bod is out there - seriously reconsider the pay growth/real earnings stuff for 2014. It will turn into lame duck argument. The signs are all there and with the financial services industry almost booming again, the headline rate of pay growth could rise much more quickly than anyone expects.
The Chart on the next page (p11) is worth a look to. The number of hours worked in the UK has increased by 17.6m in a year and is now over 30m more than it was in 2008. This is one of the reasons (along with substantial increases in personal allowances) why the figures showing average wage increases are a bit misleading.
Amusingly see another tweet by David Smith - our dear chum Paul Krugman has based a NY Times opinion piece on recent Uk borrowing without factoring for the Royal Mail pension transfer - he really is a poor man's Blanchflower....
I must admit it is not great for the soul backing Labour. You start wishing for bad news, hoping the unemployment figures are up, inflation is up. I can't imagine what its like to actually SUPPORT the Labour party. That must be terrible indeed.
I'll be back on the Blue team from 2015 I think, think that is where the value will be in the betting at any rate...
I must admit it is not great for the soul backing Labour. You start wishing for bad news, hoping the unemployment figures are up, inflation is up. I can't imagine what its like to actually SUPPORT the Labour party. That must be terrible indeed.
It's probably much like backing the Tories was before 2010.
Disagree, Mr. Neil. Getting Brown out of office was clearly a good thing for the country.
I can see how someone who once said they thought the Labour party was opposed to success might think there is a huge difference between wanting Labour out and wanting the Tories out but there isnt really.
I must admit it is not great for the soul backing Labour. You start wishing for bad news, hoping the unemployment figures are up, inflation is up. I can't imagine what its like to actually SUPPORT the Labour party. That must be terrible indeed.
I'll be back on the Blue team from 2015 I think, think that is where the value will be in the betting at any rate...
To paraphrase a poet ; Deprivation is to Labour what daffodils were to Wordsworth.
Also rans come from nowhere to win a hypermarginal seat?
I can't think at the moment of any recent analogy.
There is no credible evidence that UKIP are on course to win even a single seat in 2015, and I'll eat my hat if this is it!
There is no recent analogy for a party coming from nowhere to be a steady 10-15%+ in the polls. Out of interest, what would you count as 'credible evidence'? I have my doubts as to whether UKIP will win a seat but local election results and the by-election in Eastleigh certainly suggest the possibility.
An evenly-spread 15% gets you nothing under FPTP, and I'll also eat my hat if UKIP get anywhere near that in 2015.
Credible evidence? Well a couple of by-election wins would be a start. The SDP won 2 in 1981/2, including one with 50% of the vote. Come 1983 how many seats did they win?
1 of the by-election seats was held. (doesn't look like UKIP are going to have a by-election win to defend) 4 popular defectors held on. (UKIP won't have this as an option) 1 seat was gained. (the Liberals essentially handed it to them on a plate. Again, no gift-horses on the horizon for UKIP)
Good to see Simon Hughes being appointed Minister of State at Department of Justice. That will really get up the Tories noses.
Smart move for Hughes and for Lib Dems as they struggle to hold onto seats like Bermondsey. I know from personal experience that he's a great MP and I've voted for him on many occasions even though I'm a Labour member.
The vast majority of UK workers are going to see their pay rise faster than inflation next year, and while bankers and builders could struggle I don't think many will lose too much sleep over it.
Builders won't be struggling in 2014. I was talking to an architect yesterday who has been running a large practice for 35 years and who has offices in London, the SE and the Midlands. He confirmed what the figures show: the construction sector is going great guns again, after a dire few years, to the extent that construction companies are having difficulty sourcing enough materials. Even the Midlands and North, where activity had fallen off a cliff post 2009, is beginning to get back to a reasonable level of work for architect practices - and that means construction will follow and pay/self-employed income in the sector will rise.
If you want to know what will be happening in the economy over the next year or so, it's always a good idea to talk to architects and to companies in the motor-industry supply chain.
Oh, forgot to update everyone on my meeting yesterday.
It went well, we had a run through of my strengths, I had to declare any current equity holdings, he had a look through my personal stock portfolio and seemed impressed (started with £14k in 2011, worth £25k today excluding dividend payments). He said I would have to take a few courses.
I took Bobajob's advice on dress code, thanks for that btw! Also took ALP's advice on meeting other analysts there. They are all a bit like me, geeky, focussed, highly analytical. We went for a drink afterwards, I get the feeling they don't like traders.
He said I would have to go through the official vetting process with HR, but no formal interview, just a meeting like the one I already had with another senior analyst.
All in all it was very positive. I think even if the pay wasn't as good as what's on offer I would take it, not that he needs to know! He said HR will contact me for a meeting, and to bring my passport etc...
Thank you. I've been a lurker for many years and today I decided to pluck up the courage to post. When you've not done it before it is quite a daunting experience.
FPT @RichardNabavi & @Charles ...OGH may have questions about Hopi's methodology but I think this misses the point..
thanks for the kind comments - much appreciated.
I would say though, that I think Mike's objection -from what he's said- is a perfectly reasonable one.
I have tried to net off the impact of 2010 voters who now say they won't vote when calculating the impact in overall vote share terms - taking the DK/WV off and then calculating the 'share of the remainder' but it is a pretty labourious task, not helped by the way YG present this data.
However, the changing proportion of people who say they'll vote is clearly as significant as how the remainder split. So I certainly agree with Mike that it would be far better to have the data for 2010 voters presented with non-voters included, rather than separated out. (this is, IIRC, the way populus do it). That way you'd see the impact of churn far more clearly.
Right now, for example, if a group of 2010 LD voters who are undecided came back to the LDs, this would seem to depress the 'labour share' of 2010 LDs without Labour losing a single actual voter. Which would be quite confusing.
As far as I can tell, however, 2010 LibDems who say they won't vote are consistently between 20-25 of the total, and it doesn't seem to have changed much over the last year. There seems to have been a slight increase in the number of 2010 Labour voters who now say they won't vote, and of those that will, slightly more say they'll vote LD/Tory/UKIP. This, combined with a lower proportion of LDs and Tories saying they'll vote Labour, accounts for much of Labour's share. For the LDs, the number of 2010 voters saying they won't vote seems to be reasonably steady, for the Tories, it may have changed, but frankly, the share going directly to Labour is both small and little change, so I doubt it would make much difference!
Just looking through more detail of pay growth. Labour are in big trouble if they keep pushing it here. The signs are there for a significant recovery in pay growth in for the ca. 25m private sector workers out there over the next few months. The sector dragging down the headline rate of pay growth was financial services and construction had poor YoY growth too. The rest of the economy has seen pay growth close to 2% YoY.
The vast majority of UK workers are going to see their pay rise faster than inflation next year, and while bankers and builders could struggle I don't think many will lose too much sleep over it.
If a Labour bod is out there - seriously reconsider the pay growth/real earnings stuff for 2014. It will turn into lame duck argument. The signs are all there and with the financial services industry almost booming again, the headline rate of pay growth could rise much more quickly than anyone expects.
Smart move for Hughes and for Lib Dems as they struggle to hold onto seats like Bermondsey.
You think it will help him hang on?
I think that Hughes has got to get into a public battle with Grayling on one of his more nasty measures. He's a great local MP but all Lib Dems facing Labour are going to find it challenging. The coalition is not popular round here. This was where Grant Shapps first tried to get into parliament.
Thank you. I've been a lurker for many years and today I decided to pluck up the courage to post. When you've not done it before it is quite a daunting experience.
You're amongst friends. Most PB labour supporters voted LD at the last GE. Your choice in 2015 is a hot topic on PB.
Just looking through more detail of pay growth. Labour are in big trouble if they keep pushing it here. The signs are there for a significant recovery in pay growth in for the ca. 25m private sector workers out there over the next few months. The sector dragging down the headline rate of pay growth was financial services and construction had poor YoY growth too. The rest of the economy has seen pay growth close to 2% YoY.
The vast majority of UK workers are going to see their pay rise faster than inflation next year, and while bankers and builders could struggle I don't think many will lose too much sleep over it.
If a Labour bod is out there - seriously reconsider the pay growth/real earnings stuff for 2014. It will turn into lame duck argument. The signs are all there and with the financial services industry almost booming again, the headline rate of pay growth could rise much more quickly than anyone expects.
Pay growth now is 0.8%
Surbiton, what have I told you about confusing posters on here with facts.
I live in the same constituency. I think the danger of joining Government is that he is seen as more of a Coalitionista and that could put off left-of-centre voters but there are loads of Tory votes to play for too so maybe he's hoping the net effect is positive if it makes them more inclined to support him to keep Labour out. He's got a tough job (and the 2012 results here were abysmal for the Lib Dems) but he's been written off plenty of times before. IOS who works for Labour and also lives in the constituency predicted that he wouldnt even bother to stand it was so obvious he would lose!
Oh, forgot to update everyone on my meeting yesterday.
It went well, we had a run through of my strengths, I had to declare any current equity holdings, he had a look through my personal stock portfolio and seemed impressed (started with £14k in 2011, worth £25k today excluding dividend payments). He said I would have to take a few courses.
I took Bobajob's advice on dress code, thanks for that btw! Also took ALP's advice on meeting other analysts there. They are all a bit like me, geeky, focussed, highly analytical. We went for a drink afterwards, I get the feeling they don't like traders.
He said I would have to go through the official vetting process with HR, but no formal interview, just a meeting like the one I already had with another senior analyst.
All in all it was very positive. I think even if the pay wasn't as good as what's on offer I would take it, not that he needs to know! He said HR will contact me for a meeting, and to bring my passport etc...
Crazy how fast these things move. :O
When you're in the groove, you're in the groove. Run with it and good luck MaxPB.
Just looking through more detail of pay growth. Labour are in big trouble if they keep pushing it here. The signs are there for a significant recovery in pay growth in for the ca. 25m private sector workers out there over the next few months. The sector dragging down the headline rate of pay growth was financial services and construction had poor YoY growth too. The rest of the economy has seen pay growth close to 2% YoY.
The vast majority of UK workers are going to see their pay rise faster than inflation next year, and while bankers and builders could struggle I don't think many will lose too much sleep over it.
If a Labour bod is out there - seriously reconsider the pay growth/real earnings stuff for 2014. It will turn into lame duck argument. The signs are all there and with the financial services industry almost booming again, the headline rate of pay growth could rise much more quickly than anyone expects.
No point posting that Max. I said the same back in September when EdM played the cost of living card, Labour think they have a real winner but have actually moved onto HMG turf and will lose the argument as the economy recovers and tax bribes are released. But they want to believe it's a foolproof plan so you can't persuade them otherwise.
Just looking through more detail of pay growth. Labour are in big trouble if they keep pushing it here. The signs are there for a significant recovery in pay growth in for the ca. 25m private sector workers out there over the next few months. The sector dragging down the headline rate of pay growth was financial services and construction had poor YoY growth too. The rest of the economy has seen pay growth close to 2% YoY.
The vast majority of UK workers are going to see their pay rise faster than inflation next year, and while bankers and builders could struggle I don't think many will lose too much sleep over it.
If a Labour bod is out there - seriously reconsider the pay growth/real earnings stuff for 2014. It will turn into lame duck argument. The signs are all there and with the financial services industry almost booming again, the headline rate of pay growth could rise much more quickly than anyone expects.
Pay growth now is 0.8%
MaxPB was talking specifically about private sector pay growth which is running at much higher levels currently.
Smart move for Hughes and for Lib Dems as they struggle to hold onto seats like Bermondsey.
You think it will help him hang on?
I think that Hughes has got to get into a public battle with Grayling on one of his more nasty measures. He's a great local MP but all Lib Dems facing Labour are going to find it challenging. The coalition is not popular round here. This was where Grant Shapps first tried to get into parliament.
Welcome HilmanMinx (with one el), even though I think the L/Dems are a busted flush.
Comments
Still, as a trading bet...
On at 40-1
Use resources to win a seat back from the blues or to keep three adjacent seats yellow?
If (and they may not be) resources are limited, which action is most important, will the local parties agree with a dictat from on high issuing priorities and how do you not get caught doing a bit of each and failing in all directions?
http://hopisen.com/2013/only-read-this-post-if-youre-a-political-nerd/
No it isn't. One Nation Labour haven't got a chance in this part of the nation.
The seat (or its predecessor) was also represented by Labour whose former MP, Candy Atherton, is a Cornwall County Councillor in Falmouth.
I respect those who think UKIP but Labour at 8/1 looks the bet for me.
Is this the norm with betting agencies - or just for those with a successful (and therefore risky) track record?
I can't think at the moment of any recent analogy.
There is no credible evidence that UKIP are on course to win even a single seat in 2015, and I'll eat my hat if this is it!
The fact that most people are betting with their heart multiplies this more than in most betting mediums
Brown bouncers ?
The Hopi Sen article is truly excellent. Hopi has the ability to take us through the process of paint drying - or in this case peeling - and make us enjoy and understand every step.
Hopi hasn't told us anything new or surprising. He has just revealed the truth in all its mundane simplicity.
OGH may have questions about Hopi's methodology but I think this misses the point. Hopi represents the elegance of simplicity and the wisdom of the sane.
Taylor won with a majority of 18,000, defeating the incumbent Labour MP and junior minister, David Lock.
In short, you could argue it all 4 ways. As the best proxy for "unpredictable" UKIP successes it's not a bad portfolio bet, perhaps, but I can't see that anyone can honestly claim to have a clue what colour this seat will be in 18 months time. And that's without even mentioning Mebyon.
I suspect this seat will turn out to be a good value loser for UKIP - Probably come 2nd.
But you never know....
I'm given to understand that Labour have an edge in the ground game too.
Do we know if we are in 4 party politics because we are in a coalition and one opposition party is not enough (sorry Greens, you seem to have been usurped here) or because UKIP resonates?
We don't know the Scotland situation. Will the independence referendum change votes if it is won, or will it change votes if it is lost because it has highlighted the West Lothian question to the general English population?
Do we know how much of Labour 2010 was a hang on to the experienced Mr Brown vote in these turbulent times? There was some in there, I believe.
Do we know how attitudes and polls are reacting to the unusual lack of 'election date speculation' in the media, which was rampant before the fixed term act, and maybe would have hardened poll responses as the prospect of election was ramped up.
For 2015 there are more major imponderables than I can recollect for many and election, making polls and predictions far less certain and less comparable to past situations than for many a year.
Of course, Angus Robertson, SNP MP, has called for the 2015 election to be postponed in the event of a Yes vote.
I see this as a Tory hold but 40/1 on UKIP and 8/1 on Labour were both decent enough prices if the Lib Dems are really out of it (and they seem to be). If UKIP has come in a lot and Labour drifted then the value is probably with Labour now.
I would say it make a Conservative Minority Gov't far more likely however.
Someone will have eaten someone else's lobster and that will be the deciding factor.
pic.twitter.com/fCqaPMHgRq
He gains the most gravitas. Dave looks distinctly odd.
All that is left now is for Paddy's odds compiler to push Conservatives out to Evens and it will GSM !
Do you need a twitter account to get these links? I have resisted so far. Putting them into google never seems to produce anything.
http://labourlist.org/2013/12/ed-balls-will-be-shadow-chancellor-going-into-the-next-election-says-ed-miliband/
Interesting labour market detail: 93% of employment growth in latest 12 months was among UK nationals: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/dcp171778_338181.pdf … (p10)
Gordon Brown should be happy..
"In short, you could argue it all 4 ways."
... if that is even remotely true, and one of the four options is 33/1 then it is a fantastic bet
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HM-4agdgBqk
Credible evidence? Well a couple of by-election wins would be a start. The SDP won 2 in 1981/2, including one with 50% of the vote. Come 1983 how many seats did they win?
1 of the by-election seats was held. (doesn't look like UKIP are going to have a by-election win to defend)
4 popular defectors held on. (UKIP won't have this as an option)
1 seat was gained. (the Liberals essentially handed it to them on a plate. Again, no gift-horses on the horizon for UKIP)
Looking at the seats, I think the LDs will hold North Cornwall and the Conservatives will probably hold SE Cornwall but none of the other seats is easy to call. Oddly enough, I could imagine the LDs winning St Austell and losing St Ives but it's far from clear.
"Eating someone else's lobster" is a euphemism I'm not familiar with. Intriguing.
Paddy Power say No at 2/5...
The vast majority of UK workers are going to see their pay rise faster than inflation next year, and while bankers and builders could struggle I don't think many will lose too much sleep over it.
If a Labour bod is out there - seriously reconsider the pay growth/real earnings stuff for 2014. It will turn into lame duck argument. The signs are all there and with the financial services industry almost booming again, the headline rate of pay growth could rise much more quickly than anyone expects.
I'll be back on the Blue team from 2015 I think, think that is where the value will be in the betting at any rate...
Can't imagine he'll be doing that again.
"He will have to serve at least two-thirds of the 29 years "
Everyone knows 'at least' means 'at the most' with the UK justice system.
Smart move for Hughes and for Lib Dems as they struggle to hold onto seats like Bermondsey. I know from personal experience that he's a great MP and I've voted for him on many occasions even though I'm a Labour member.
If you want to know what will be happening in the economy over the next year or so, it's always a good idea to talk to architects and to companies in the motor-industry supply chain.
It went well, we had a run through of my strengths, I had to declare any current equity holdings, he had a look through my personal stock portfolio and seemed impressed (started with £14k in 2011, worth £25k today excluding dividend payments). He said I would have to take a few courses.
I took Bobajob's advice on dress code, thanks for that btw! Also took ALP's advice on meeting other analysts there. They are all a bit like me, geeky, focussed, highly analytical. We went for a drink afterwards, I get the feeling they don't like traders.
He said I would have to go through the official vetting process with HR, but no formal interview, just a meeting like the one I already had with another senior analyst.
All in all it was very positive. I think even if the pay wasn't as good as what's on offer I would take it, not that he needs to know! He said HR will contact me for a meeting, and to bring my passport etc...
Crazy how fast these things move. :O
I would say though, that I think Mike's objection -from what he's said- is a perfectly reasonable one.
I have tried to net off the impact of 2010 voters who now say they won't vote when calculating the impact in overall vote share terms - taking the DK/WV off and then calculating the 'share of the remainder' but it is a pretty labourious task, not helped by the way YG present this data.
However, the changing proportion of people who say they'll vote is clearly as significant as how the remainder split. So I certainly agree with Mike that it would be far better to have the data for 2010 voters presented with non-voters included, rather than separated out. (this is, IIRC, the way populus do it). That way you'd see the impact of churn far more clearly.
Right now, for example, if a group of 2010 LD voters who are undecided came back to the LDs, this would seem to depress the 'labour share' of 2010 LDs without Labour losing a single actual voter. Which would be quite confusing.
As far as I can tell, however, 2010 LibDems who say they won't vote are consistently between 20-25 of the total, and it doesn't seem to have changed much over the last year. There seems to have been a slight increase in the number of 2010 Labour voters who now say they won't vote, and of those that will, slightly more say they'll vote LD/Tory/UKIP. This, combined with a lower proportion of LDs and Tories saying they'll vote Labour, accounts for much of Labour's share. For the LDs, the number of 2010 voters saying they won't vote seems to be reasonably steady, for the Tories, it may have changed, but frankly, the share going directly to Labour is both small and little change, so I doubt it would make much difference!
@MaxPB - Congratulations - when the deal is signed would you mind letting on which Bank it is that will be benefiting from your analysis?
btw congrats on the job.
http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/