Chatter on Betfair forum speculating that they won`t settle until 6 Jan.
A comment from one poster:
"I guess it's possible that someone high up has decided that:
a) they're still raking in the money (and commission) on this market
b) they're going to spend the next month+ dealing with angry people who feel cheated regardless of what they do
So they may as well double down and just wait for 6th / 20th Jan. However, whilst the Trump backers don't have an actual case, those with money tied up on Biden most certainly do, and you'd think the Gambling Commission might HAVE to do something if they continue to pretend that this outcome isn't already plenty decided (on the basis of their own market rules). But who knows!"
The risk of an asymmetry in the settlement should have had them settling as soon as they could.
Every day they're opening themselves up to risk. In that it's arguable that people are betting on a sure thing. Those laying the prices could argue that it wasn't clear because BF themselves had decided it wasn't clear.
Madness.
Yes. They have now told people via Customer Service that the market is a market on who will be President next. However the market rules are clear that it's over and it's Biden, no matter what happens next.
In the extreme scenario that Trump somehow pulls off a coup (or, indeed, that Pence or Harris are next Presidents) Betfair now face the risk of having to pay everyone out as a winner, depending when they placed their bet, on a £1bn+ market.
Chatter on Betfair forum speculating that they won`t settle until 6 Jan.
A comment from one poster:
"I guess it's possible that someone high up has decided that:
a) they're still raking in the money (and commission) on this market
b) they're going to spend the next month+ dealing with angry people who feel cheated regardless of what they do
So they may as well double down and just wait for 6th / 20th Jan. However, whilst the Trump backers don't have an actual case, those with money tied up on Biden most certainly do, and you'd think the Gambling Commission might HAVE to do something if they continue to pretend that this outcome isn't already plenty decided (on the basis of their own market rules). But who knows!"
The risk of an asymmetry in the settlement should have had them settling as soon as they could.
Every day they're opening themselves up to risk. In that it's arguable that people are betting on a sure thing. Those laying the prices could argue that it wasn't clear because BF themselves had decided it wasn't clear.
Madness.
Yes. They have now told people via Customer Service that the market is a market on who will be President next. However the market rules are clear that it's over and it's Biden, no matter what happens next.
In the extreme scenario that Trump somehow pulls off a coup (or, indeed, that Pence or Harris are next Presidents) Betfair now face the risk of having to pay everyone out as a winner, depending when they placed their bet, on a £1bn+ market.
Their Ts and Cs are quite clear that the market is on projected EC votes, and that *subsequent* events such as the *actual* EC vote will be disregarded.
Given that the actual EC vote is now ongoing, they’ve really not got a leg to stand on.
Do they want to have punters with all their cash tied up, over over the Christmas football fixture list?
Someone with big pockets is surely about to announce they’re sueing Betfair’s arse?
AZ Dem 1.03 GA Dem 1.03 MI Dem 1.03 NV Dem 1.02 PA Dem 1.02 WI Dem 1.04
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.06 Trump exit date 2021 1.05
That doesn`t bode well for a settlement tomorrow.
Having totally messed settlement up their best hope is to settle of the ostensibly biggest thing. That's tomorrow.
They are so lucky that the settlement as per their rules and the settlement (as is almost certainly the case) tomorrow will be the same.
There is no sign of the huge sums available at extreme odds being withdrawn. This isn't normal punter money, but rather money being laundered. Until it diminishes, there must be every chance Betfair keep the market(s) open.
If there is any basis for thinking this really is a massive money laundering operation, there must be a risk the whole market crashes down as Federal authorities step in and close it down.
AZ Dem 1.03 GA Dem 1.03 MI Dem 1.03 NV Dem 1.02 PA Dem 1.02 WI Dem 1.04
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.06 Trump exit date 2021 1.05
That doesn`t bode well for a settlement tomorrow.
Having totally messed settlement up their best hope is to settle of the ostensibly biggest thing. That's tomorrow.
They are so lucky that the settlement as per their rules and the settlement (as is almost certainly the case) tomorrow will be the same.
There is no sign of the huge sums available at extreme odds being withdrawn. This isn't normal punter money, but rather money being laundered. Until it diminishes, there must be every chance Betfair keep the market(s) open.
So we’re waiting until the inauguration, basically.
AZ Dem 1.03 GA Dem 1.03 MI Dem 1.03 NV Dem 1.02 PA Dem 1.02 WI Dem 1.04
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.06 Trump exit date 2021 1.05
That doesn`t bode well for a settlement tomorrow.
Having totally messed settlement up their best hope is to settle of the ostensibly biggest thing. That's tomorrow.
They are so lucky that the settlement as per their rules and the settlement (as is almost certainly the case) tomorrow will be the same.
There is no sign of the huge sums available at extreme odds being withdrawn. This isn't normal punter money, but rather money being laundered. Until it diminishes, there must be every chance Betfair keep the market(s) open.
So we’re waiting until the inauguration, basically.
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
The delay will cost lives, clearly the vaccine is safe, Covid in old and ill people is deadly. Its complete madness.
It looks to me that the difference between the UK and the EU is in the management of adverse effects. The Pfizer vaccine is safe to use in general, but there will be a small proportion of adverse effects, allergies and so on. The EU wants a proper management and reporting plan in place before giving the go-ahead; the UK will deal with these as ad-hoc events. Arguably, the UK and other countries get a free ride from the EU doing this work, but actually it's fine. Vaccines are an international effort.
AZ Dem 1.03 GA Dem 1.03 MI Dem 1.03 NV Dem 1.02 PA Dem 1.02 WI Dem 1.04
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.06 Trump exit date 2021 1.05
That doesn`t bode well for a settlement tomorrow.
Having totally messed settlement up their best hope is to settle of the ostensibly biggest thing. That's tomorrow.
They are so lucky that the settlement as per their rules and the settlement (as is almost certainly the case) tomorrow will be the same.
There is no sign of the huge sums available at extreme odds being withdrawn. This isn't normal punter money, but rather money being laundered. Until it diminishes, there must be every chance Betfair keep the market(s) open.
If there is any basis for thinking this really is a massive money laundering operation, there must be a risk the whole market crashes down as Federal authorities step in and close it down.
I dont think the Malta Gaming Authority will do that. But I think they and the Gambling Commission should have a proper look at the whole event and how bookies have handled it. Especially where, as correctly spotted by several on here, they're ignoring their own rules.
AZ Dem 1.03 GA Dem 1.03 MI Dem 1.03 NV Dem 1.02 PA Dem 1.02 WI Dem 1.04
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.06 Trump exit date 2021 1.05
That doesn`t bode well for a settlement tomorrow.
Having totally messed settlement up their best hope is to settle of the ostensibly biggest thing. That's tomorrow.
They are so lucky that the settlement as per their rules and the settlement (as is almost certainly the case) tomorrow will be the same.
There is no sign of the huge sums available at extreme odds being withdrawn. This isn't normal punter money, but rather money being laundered. Until it diminishes, there must be every chance Betfair keep the market(s) open.
If there is any basis for thinking this really is a massive money laundering operation, there must be a risk the whole market crashes down as Federal authorities step in and close it down.
I dont think the Malta Gaming Authority will do that. But I think they and the Gambling Commission should have a proper look at the whole event and how bookies have handled it. Especially where, as correctly spotted by several on here, they're ignoring their own rules.
Let’s start by, post-Brexit, insisting that bookmakers and exchanges offering bets to U.K. customers have U.K. entities registered onshore.
AZ Dem 1.03 GA Dem 1.03 MI Dem 1.03 NV Dem 1.02 PA Dem 1.02 WI Dem 1.04
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.06 Trump exit date 2021 1.05
That doesn`t bode well for a settlement tomorrow.
Having totally messed settlement up their best hope is to settle of the ostensibly biggest thing. That's tomorrow.
They are so lucky that the settlement as per their rules and the settlement (as is almost certainly the case) tomorrow will be the same.
There is no sign of the huge sums available at extreme odds being withdrawn. This isn't normal punter money, but rather money being laundered. Until it diminishes, there must be every chance Betfair keep the market(s) open.
If there is any basis for thinking this really is a massive money laundering operation, there must be a risk the whole market crashes down as Federal authorities step in and close it down.
I am not convinced by Peter's argument on this. There have in the past been issues with Paddy Power/Betfair over anti-money laundering compliance, but my understanding at present is that transactions are traceable and it shouldn't be an issue. Very serious if it is, of course, but my view is a lot of money has been placed by people who don't understand the rules and/or felt Trump's legal challenges had some prospect of success.
Does anyone think anywhere will move down on Wednesday? If so who is favourite?
Tory seats in tier 3?
Seriously, parts of Kent (dividing the county as per Essex) and some rural counties in the south west. And those parts of the north where case rates are now declining.
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
The delay will cost lives, clearly the vaccine is safe, Covid in old and ill people is deadly. Its complete madness.
It looks to me that the difference between the UK and the EU is in the management of adverse effects. The Pfizer vaccine is safe to use in general, but there will be a small proportion of adverse effects, allergies and so on. The EU wants a proper management and reporting plan in place before giving the go-ahead; the UK will deal with these as ad-hoc events. Arguably, the UK and other countries get a free ride from the EU doing this work, but actually it's fine. Vaccines are an international effort.
A management plan surely can be devised months in advance. Why wait until the vaccine has been submitted?
Chatter on Betfair forum speculating that they won`t settle until 6 Jan.
A comment from one poster:
"I guess it's possible that someone high up has decided that:
a) they're still raking in the money (and commission) on this market
b) they're going to spend the next month+ dealing with angry people who feel cheated regardless of what they do
So they may as well double down and just wait for 6th / 20th Jan. However, whilst the Trump backers don't have an actual case, those with money tied up on Biden most certainly do, and you'd think the Gambling Commission might HAVE to do something if they continue to pretend that this outcome isn't already plenty decided (on the basis of their own market rules). But who knows!"
It's unethical in my view to take bets which turn entirely on bookmakers' interpretation of their own rules and not on objective events.
Chatter on Betfair forum speculating that they won`t settle until 6 Jan.
A comment from one poster:
"I guess it's possible that someone high up has decided that:
a) they're still raking in the money (and commission) on this market
b) they're going to spend the next month+ dealing with angry people who feel cheated regardless of what they do
So they may as well double down and just wait for 6th / 20th Jan. However, whilst the Trump backers don't have an actual case, those with money tied up on Biden most certainly do, and you'd think the Gambling Commission might HAVE to do something if they continue to pretend that this outcome isn't already plenty decided (on the basis of their own market rules). But who knows!"
It's unethical in my view to take bets which turn entirely on bookmakers' interpretation of their own rules and not on objective events.
I think inauguration day is the only sure thing now.
AZ Dem 1.03 GA Dem 1.03 MI Dem 1.03 NV Dem 1.02 PA Dem 1.02 WI Dem 1.04
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.06 Trump exit date 2021 1.05
That doesn`t bode well for a settlement tomorrow.
Having totally messed settlement up their best hope is to settle of the ostensibly biggest thing. That's tomorrow.
They are so lucky that the settlement as per their rules and the settlement (as is almost certainly the case) tomorrow will be the same.
There is no sign of the huge sums available at extreme odds being withdrawn. This isn't normal punter money, but rather money being laundered. Until it diminishes, there must be every chance Betfair keep the market(s) open.
If there is any basis for thinking this really is a massive money laundering operation, there must be a risk the whole market crashes down as Federal authorities step in and close it down.
I dont think the Malta Gaming Authority will do that. But I think they and the Gambling Commission should have a proper look at the whole event and how bookies have handled it. Especially where, as correctly spotted by several on here, they're ignoring their own rules.
Unless Betfair is being leant on to keep the market open - so other agencies can follow the dodgy money.
Betfair's action seem so detrimental to their reputation you do start looking around for alternative explanation - however weird.
Does anyone think anywhere will move down on Wednesday? If so who is favourite?
Tory seats in tier 3?
Seriously, parts of Kent (dividing the county as per Essex) and some rural counties in the south west. And those parts of the north where case rates are now declining.
Devon is probably staying in Tier 2 because the Royal Devon and Exeter hospital is barely coping.
Seems like all the disputed states (disputed in the mind of Trump that is) bar Michigan have announced their results. I very much hope Betfraud are going to face some consequences.
Just imagine if the Dems didn’t hold the House then effectively the election could have been stolen for Trump,.
The USA is in a terrible state where one party is becoming fascist and where the polarization makes the Brexit divide in the UK look like a love in .
How would it have been stolen had the GOP taken the House? The electoral votes would have been the same and the certification process would have just been a formality by the VP.
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
The delay will cost lives, clearly the vaccine is safe, Covid in old and ill people is deadly. Its complete madness.
It looks to me that the difference between the UK and the EU is in the management of adverse effects. The Pfizer vaccine is safe to use in general, but there will be a small proportion of adverse effects, allergies and so on. The EU wants a proper management and reporting plan in place before giving the go-ahead; the UK will deal with these as ad-hoc events. Arguably, the UK and other countries get a free ride from the EU doing this work, but actually it's fine. Vaccines are an international effort.
Have they not got a reporting mechanism in the EU? I'd be really surprised if they haven't. You can already report any sort of side effect for any medicine in the the UK at https://yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk/
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
The delay will cost lives, clearly the vaccine is safe, Covid in old and ill people is deadly. Its complete madness.
It looks to me that the difference between the UK and the EU is in the management of adverse effects. The Pfizer vaccine is safe to use in general, but there will be a small proportion of adverse effects, allergies and so on. The EU wants a proper management and reporting plan in place before giving the go-ahead; the UK will deal with these as ad-hoc events. Arguably, the UK and other countries get a free ride from the EU doing this work, but actually it's fine. Vaccines are an international effort.
A management plan surely can be devised months in advance. Why wait until the vaccine has been submitted?
I think the risk management plan can only be fully fleshed out once the basis for the decision it's safe to use is fully determined. Any authorisation is conditional on the attributes of the drug. Background infohere.
I should also say that while the UK will benefit from the EU's risk management plans, these in turn will be informed by early data from the UK rollout.
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
Just imagine if the Dems didn’t hold the House then effectively the election could have been stolen for Trump,.
The USA is in a terrible state where one party is becoming fascist and where the polarization makes the Brexit divide in the UK look like a love in .
How would it have been stolen had the GOP taken the House? The electoral votes would have been the same and the certification process would have just been a formality by the VP.
See here, if they had a majority in the House and Senate they could pull this off.
Trump Allies Eye Long-Shot Election Reversal in Congress, Testing Pence
Some House Republicans plan to try to use Congress’s tallying of electoral results on Jan. 6 to tip the election to President Trump. The attempt will put Republicans in a pinch.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
The delay will cost lives, clearly the vaccine is safe, Covid in old and ill people is deadly. Its complete madness.
It looks to me that the difference between the UK and the EU is in the management of adverse effects. The Pfizer vaccine is safe to use in general, but there will be a small proportion of adverse effects, allergies and so on. The EU wants a proper management and reporting plan in place before giving the go-ahead; the UK will deal with these as ad-hoc events. Arguably, the UK and other countries get a free ride from the EU doing this work, but actually it's fine. Vaccines are an international effort.
A management plan surely can be devised months in advance. Why wait until the vaccine has been submitted?
I think the risk management plan can only be fully fleshed out once the basis for the decision it's safe to use is fully determined. Any authorisation is conditional on the attributes of the drug. Background infohere.
I should also say that while the UK will benefit from the EU's risk management plans, these in turn will be informed by early data from the UK rollout.
The attributes of the drug being the results of the phase three trials, not some management plan that could be planned for months in advance.
Just imagine if the Dems didn’t hold the House then effectively the election could have been stolen for Trump,.
The USA is in a terrible state where one party is becoming fascist and where the polarization makes the Brexit divide in the UK look like a love in .
How would it have been stolen had the GOP taken the House? The electoral votes would have been the same and the certification process would have just been a formality by the VP.
See here, if they had a majority in the House and Senate they could pull this off.
Trump Allies Eye Long-Shot Election Reversal in Congress, Testing Pence
Some House Republicans plan to try to use Congress’s tallying of electoral results on Jan. 6 to tip the election to President Trump. The attempt will put Republicans in a pinch.
I would be supportive of such measures if the North East hadn't been in essentially lockdown-lite since mid September. I live on my own and haven't been legally allowed to see any of my friends or family, other than briefly outside in the cold, since then. It just isn't sustainable for this to go on for months more.
Just makes me feel like a fool for following the rules when clearly very few other people are.
Chatter on Betfair forum speculating that they won`t settle until 6 Jan.
A comment from one poster:
"I guess it's possible that someone high up has decided that:
a) they're still raking in the money (and commission) on this market
b) they're going to spend the next month+ dealing with angry people who feel cheated regardless of what they do
So they may as well double down and just wait for 6th / 20th Jan. However, whilst the Trump backers don't have an actual case, those with money tied up on Biden most certainly do, and you'd think the Gambling Commission might HAVE to do something if they continue to pretend that this outcome isn't already plenty decided (on the basis of their own market rules). But who knows!"
It's unethical in my view to take bets which turn entirely on bookmakers' interpretation of their own rules and not on objective events.
I think inauguration day is the only sure thing now.
that wouldnt help them settle markets like EC vote bands etc though. Those have got to be finalised today surely. and if they are then the overall should too.
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
The delay will cost lives, clearly the vaccine is safe, Covid in old and ill people is deadly. Its complete madness.
It looks to me that the difference between the UK and the EU is in the management of adverse effects. The Pfizer vaccine is safe to use in general, but there will be a small proportion of adverse effects, allergies and so on. The EU wants a proper management and reporting plan in place before giving the go-ahead; the UK will deal with these as ad-hoc events. Arguably, the UK and other countries get a free ride from the EU doing this work, but actually it's fine. Vaccines are an international effort.
A management plan surely can be devised months in advance. Why wait until the vaccine has been submitted?
I think the risk management plan can only be fully fleshed out once the basis for the decision it's safe to use is fully determined. Any authorisation is conditional on the attributes of the drug. Background infohere.
I should also say that while the UK will benefit from the EU's risk management plans, these in turn will be informed by early data from the UK rollout.
I am with Rob on this one.
Every country should already have a generic risk management plan for the roll out of a new vaccine - after all there are vaccination campaigns at least annually. What are the risks associated with this vaccine which might be different from other vaccination roll outs? Most risks, I'd wager, would be the same. The main risks are the vaccine does not work or is not available (which is actually no elevation of risk from the current situation), or it has adverse side effects. What are these - generic ones for which infrastructure is already in place, or side effects specific to COVID?
I am having a hard time thinking of any infrastructure, human behaviours or medical treatments that would be truly unique to COVID outside of the vaccine, and hence of any risk which would be truly unique to COVID and hence for which some contingency plan/treatment does not already exist.
Furthermore, risk management plans are not written in stone. If a new risk is identified, it simply gets incorporated into the next version of the risk management plan
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
Does anyone think anywhere will move down on Wednesday? If so who is favourite?
Tory seats in tier 3?
Seriously, parts of Kent (dividing the county as per Essex) and some rural counties in the south west. And those parts of the north where case rates are now declining.
Devon is probably staying in Tier 2 because the Royal Devon and Exeter hospital is barely coping.
AZ Dem 1.03 GA Dem 1.03 MI Dem 1.03 NV Dem 1.02 PA Dem 1.02 WI Dem 1.04
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.06 Trump exit date 2021 1.05
That doesn`t bode well for a settlement tomorrow.
Having totally messed settlement up their best hope is to settle of the ostensibly biggest thing. That's tomorrow.
They are so lucky that the settlement as per their rules and the settlement (as is almost certainly the case) tomorrow will be the same.
There is no sign of the huge sums available at extreme odds being withdrawn. This isn't normal punter money, but rather money being laundered. Until it diminishes, there must be every chance Betfair keep the market(s) open.
If there is any basis for thinking this really is a massive money laundering operation, there must be a risk the whole market crashes down as Federal authorities step in and close it down.
Yes, and I believe there is that risk. That`s why when I complained to BF I was partly complaining as a concerned shareholder of Flutter Entertainment PLC.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
The problem is, John, that if Betfair are not prepared to settle in accordance with their published rules how do you know who they will settle on and why?
They are making it up as they go along. You could have a very good bet on Nancy Pelosi, for example, only to find they have alighted on a completely different basis for settling.
I see where you are coming from, and you are making sense. Betfair are not. You would be risking money with a capricious market maker.
My advice is that if you try to exploit their unpredictability, keep your stakes small and be prepared for disappointment.
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
The delay will cost lives, clearly the vaccine is safe, Covid in old and ill people is deadly. Its complete madness.
It looks to me that the difference between the UK and the EU is in the management of adverse effects. The Pfizer vaccine is safe to use in general, but there will be a small proportion of adverse effects, allergies and so on. The EU wants a proper management and reporting plan in place before giving the go-ahead; the UK will deal with these as ad-hoc events. Arguably, the UK and other countries get a free ride from the EU doing this work, but actually it's fine. Vaccines are an international effort.
A management plan surely can be devised months in advance. Why wait until the vaccine has been submitted?
I think the risk management plan can only be fully fleshed out once the basis for the decision it's safe to use is fully determined. Any authorisation is conditional on the attributes of the drug. Background infohere.
I should also say that while the UK will benefit from the EU's risk management plans, these in turn will be informed by early data from the UK rollout.
The attributes of the drug being the results of the phase three trials, not some management plan that could be planned for months in advance.
Not necessarily. You can't assess the risks unless you know what the risks are. If you get the basic authorisation out the way as soon as possible, that assessment will follow on after.
Anyway this is the set of bullet points that the EMA identify as the difference between Emergency Use Authorisation (under which the UK has released the Pfizer vaccine) and the full EMA authorisation:
info on the group of people to be given the vaccine;
the vaccine's pharmaceutical quality and purity;
manufacturing and controls of batches;
compliance with international requirements for laboratory testing and conduct of clinical trials;
types of immune responses;
side effects e.g. with regard to older people, or pregnant women;
labelling and package leaflet;
the way risks will be managed and monitored once the vaccine is authorised.
Just imagine if the Dems didn’t hold the House then effectively the election could have been stolen for Trump,.
The USA is in a terrible state where one party is becoming fascist and where the polarization makes the Brexit divide in the UK look like a love in .
How would it have been stolen had the GOP taken the House? The electoral votes would have been the same and the certification process would have just been a formality by the VP.
See here, if they had a majority in the House and Senate they could pull this off.
Trump Allies Eye Long-Shot Election Reversal in Congress, Testing Pence
Some House Republicans plan to try to use Congress’s tallying of electoral results on Jan. 6 to tip the election to President Trump. The attempt will put Republicans in a pinch.
Seems like the longest of long shots, especially with several GOP senators already saying they would never countenance such an idea.
No chance they would win but I can see a few Republican Senators looking at 2024 voting for it.
Personally, I think their main aim is to keep the issue in the spotlight rather than fade away, and then hope something comes else out in the same nature as the Hunter Biden investigation. They still wouldn't win but it would tar Biden's Presidency.
Seems like all the disputed states (disputed in the mind of Trump that is) bar Michigan have announced their results. I very much hope Betfraud are going to face some consequences.
If they keep this market open after Biden has won the actual EC vote, Betfair and any bookies following suit will imo have become a part of Trump's black ops fascist fantasy role play. Which is a very bad look indeed.
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
I don't think it matters because they aren't due any deliveries in Europe until mid January and all of the first shipments are going to Germany.
(Actually, I think the Belgians and the Dutch have slipped in ahead of the Germans and will get small confirmed shipments by the end of this month.)
Does anyone think anywhere will move down on Wednesday? If so who is favourite?
Tory seats in tier 3?
Seriously, parts of Kent (dividing the county as per Essex) and some rural counties in the south west. And those parts of the north where case rates are now declining.
Actually, the virus has spread rapidly throughout pretty much all of Kent now. That's why the Tory MPs who were complaining bitterly that their areas (Tonbridge, Maidstone, Dover, Fokestone etc.) shouldn't have been in Tier 3 have gone very quiet. The virus has spread down and across from Thanet, Medway and Swale to the more affluent parts.
I would be supportive of such measures if the North East hadn't been in essentially lockdown-lite since mid September. I live on my own and haven't been legally allowed to see any of my friends or family, other than briefly outside in the cold, since then. It just isn't sustainable for this to go on for months more.
Just makes me feel like a fool for following the rules when clearly very few other people are.
"It just isn't sustainable for this to go on for months more."
This is why Tegnell took the approach he did in Sweden.
AZ Dem 1.03 GA Dem 1.03 MI Dem 1.03 NV Dem 1.02 PA Dem 1.02 WI Dem 1.04
Trump to leave before end of term NO 1.06 Trump exit date 2021 1.05
That doesn`t bode well for a settlement tomorrow.
Having totally messed settlement up their best hope is to settle of the ostensibly biggest thing. That's tomorrow.
They are so lucky that the settlement as per their rules and the settlement (as is almost certainly the case) tomorrow will be the same.
There is no sign of the huge sums available at extreme odds being withdrawn. This isn't normal punter money, but rather money being laundered. Until it diminishes, there must be every chance Betfair keep the market(s) open.
If there is any basis for thinking this really is a massive money laundering operation, there must be a risk the whole market crashes down as Federal authorities step in and close it down.
Yes, and I believe there is that risk. That`s why when I complained to BF I was partly complaining as a concerned shareholder of Flutter Entertainment PLC.
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
The delay will cost lives, clearly the vaccine is safe, Covid in old and ill people is deadly. Its complete madness.
It looks to me that the difference between the UK and the EU is in the management of adverse effects. The Pfizer vaccine is safe to use in general, but there will be a small proportion of adverse effects, allergies and so on. The EU wants a proper management and reporting plan in place before giving the go-ahead; the UK will deal with these as ad-hoc events. Arguably, the UK and other countries get a free ride from the EU doing this work, but actually it's fine. Vaccines are an international effort.
A management plan surely can be devised months in advance. Why wait until the vaccine has been submitted?
I think the risk management plan can only be fully fleshed out once the basis for the decision it's safe to use is fully determined. Any authorisation is conditional on the attributes of the drug. Background infohere.
I should also say that while the UK will benefit from the EU's risk management plans, these in turn will be informed by early data from the UK rollout.
The attributes of the drug being the results of the phase three trials, not some management plan that could be planned for months in advance.
Not necessarily. You can't assess the risks unless you know what the risks are. If you get the basic authorisation out the way as soon as possible, that assessment will follow on after.
Anyway this is the set of bullet points that the EMA identify as the difference between Emergency Use Authorisation (under which the UK has released the Pfizer vaccine) and the full EMA authorisation:
info on the group of people to be given the vaccine;
the vaccine's pharmaceutical quality and purity;
manufacturing and controls of batches;
compliance with international requirements for laboratory testing and conduct of clinical trials;
types of immune responses;
side effects e.g. with regard to older people, or pregnant women;
labelling and package leaflet;
the way risks will be managed and monitored once the vaccine is authorised.
Reference the link above.
So you think they started from scratch with a management plan when they received the results of the phase three trials?
I would be supportive of such measures if the North East hadn't been in essentially lockdown-lite since mid September. I live on my own and haven't been legally allowed to see any of my friends or family, other than briefly outside in the cold, since then. It just isn't sustainable for this to go on for months more.
Just makes me feel like a fool for following the rules when clearly very few other people are.
"It just isn't sustainable for this to go on for months more."
This is why Tegnell took the approach he did in Sweden.
Which approach is not sustainable, either. And has been dumped.
Breaking - Kent unhappy that, government having insisted it was impracticable to split the county despite its large size and varying rates, much smaller Essex and Hertfordshire have now been split because of their varying local rates.
Perhaps they will get back to their roots and indulge in a good old fashioned Kentish rebellion?
If that rebellion includes a turkey BBQ with 30 of your mates, maybe....
Old traditions get modernised for a new era. Our ancestors may have sought to march on London and stab some townie in the guts with an improvised halberd, and we'll do things our own way.
I assume, being in the West Country, that we had plenty of rebellions, but marching to London seems an awful long way to go. Kept it local I imagine.
Out spake their Captain brave and bold: A merry wight was he: Though London Tower were Michael's hold, We'll set Trelawny free! We'll cross the Tamar, land to land: The Severn is no stay: With "one and all," and hand in hand; And who shall bid us nay?
And shall Trelawny live? Or shall Trelawny die? Here's twenty thousand Cornish men Will know the reason why!
And when we come to London Wall, A pleasant sight to view, Come forth! come forth! ye cowards all: Here's men as good as you. Trelawny he's in keep and hold; Trelawny he may die: Here's twenty thousand Cornish bold Will know the reason why
Will twenty thousand Cornish bold be laying siege to Smithson Towers on behalf of Lady wossername?
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
The problem is, John, that if Betfair are not prepared to settle in accordance with their published rules how do you know who they will settle on and why?
They are making it up as they go along. You could have a very good bet on Nancy Pelosi, for example, only to find they have alighted on a completely different basis for settling.
I see where you are coming from, and you are making sense. Betfair are not. You would be risking money with a capricious market maker.
My advice is that if you try to exploit their unpredictability, keep your stakes small and be prepared for disappointment.
The really good thing with BF is that (as far as I believe) your money is reasonably safe.
(If you make a killer bet on next pm that has a likely payout in 2024 then there's no great merit on a big gain if your money has a big chance of vanishing beforehand)
Nobody seems to wish to say good things about Smarkets financial strength. (Nobody is saying bad things either).
Does anyone have any idea why the EU has not approved the Pfizer vaccine?
They are following the procedures for 'provisional' authorisation, which are more onerous and take longer than those required for the 'emergency' authorisation we used.
Seems pretty daft to me - if this isn't an emergency, what is? They'll have lost a month.
The delay will cost lives, clearly the vaccine is safe, Covid in old and ill people is deadly. Its complete madness.
It looks to me that the difference between the UK and the EU is in the management of adverse effects. The Pfizer vaccine is safe to use in general, but there will be a small proportion of adverse effects, allergies and so on. The EU wants a proper management and reporting plan in place before giving the go-ahead; the UK will deal with these as ad-hoc events. Arguably, the UK and other countries get a free ride from the EU doing this work, but actually it's fine. Vaccines are an international effort.
A management plan surely can be devised months in advance. Why wait until the vaccine has been submitted?
I think the risk management plan can only be fully fleshed out once the basis for the decision it's safe to use is fully determined. Any authorisation is conditional on the attributes of the drug. Background infohere.
I should also say that while the UK will benefit from the EU's risk management plans, these in turn will be informed by early data from the UK rollout.
The attributes of the drug being the results of the phase three trials, not some management plan that could be planned for months in advance.
Not necessarily. You can't assess the risks unless you know what the risks are. If you get the basic authorisation out the way as soon as possible, that assessment will follow on after.
Anyway this is the set of bullet points that the EMA identify as the difference between Emergency Use Authorisation (under which the UK has released the Pfizer vaccine) and the full EMA authorisation:
info on the group of people to be given the vaccine;
the vaccine's pharmaceutical quality and purity;
manufacturing and controls of batches;
compliance with international requirements for laboratory testing and conduct of clinical trials;
types of immune responses;
side effects e.g. with regard to older people, or pregnant women;
labelling and package leaflet;
the way risks will be managed and monitored once the vaccine is authorised.
Reference the link above.
I think risk assessment is highly overrated, particularly where risks cannot be calculated with high degrees of precision or confidence. Risk management does not rely upon risk calculation, but on hazard identification, and upon eliminating or mitigating down to acceptable levels the impacts of the risks associated with those hazards.
That list identifies hazards. You don't need to calculate the risks to put in place risk controls for them.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
The problem is, John, that if Betfair are not prepared to settle in accordance with their published rules how do you know who they will settle on and why?
They are making it up as they go along. You could have a very good bet on Nancy Pelosi, for example, only to find they have alighted on a completely different basis for settling.
I see where you are coming from, and you are making sense. Betfair are not. You would be risking money with a capricious market maker.
My advice is that if you try to exploit their unpredictability, keep your stakes small and be prepared for disappointment.
It’s more than making it up as they go along - they have changed wholesale the basis on which they said they’d settle the market. There is zero case for them not to settle tomorrow. The winner is more than just projected; the winner has been declared by the electoral college
Seems like all the disputed states (disputed in the mind of Trump that is) bar Michigan have announced their results. I very much hope Betfraud are going to face some consequences.
If they keep this market open after Biden has won the actual EC vote, Betfair and any bookies following suit will imo have become a part of Trump's black ops fascist fantasy role play. Which is a very bad look indeed.
Worse than that - they will have destroyed their good name as a reliable place to bet.
Does anyone think anywhere will move down on Wednesday? If so who is favourite?
Tory seats in tier 3?
Seriously, parts of Kent (dividing the county as per Essex) and some rural counties in the south west. And those parts of the north where case rates are now declining.
Actually, the virus has spread rapidly throughout pretty much all of Kent now. That's why the Tory MPs who were complaining bitterly that their areas (Tonbridge, Maidstone, Dover, Fokestone etc.) shouldn't have been in Tier 3 have gone very quiet. The virus has spread down and across from Thanet, Medway and Swale to the more affluent parts.
The governments interactive map still shows the western strip of kent as being in light blue, no worse than much of the Home Counties. But it is a few days out of date.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If it should go to a contigent election, then the House would elect Trump as there would be sufficient Republican-majority state delegations in the new House.
Seems like all the disputed states (disputed in the mind of Trump that is) bar Michigan have announced their results. I very much hope Betfraud are going to face some consequences.
If they keep this market open after Biden has won the actual EC vote, Betfair and any bookies following suit will imo have become a part of Trump's black ops fascist fantasy role play. Which is a very bad look indeed.
Worse than that - they will have destroyed their good name as a reliable place to bet.
Yes. They HAVE to settle it on the EC vote. Last chance saloon for them.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If it should go to a contigent election, then the House would elect Trump as there would be sufficient Republican-majority state delegations in the new House.
That requires the Democrat House to vote against the electoral college. The senate alone may be able to prevent Biden winning. It cannot force any other outcome, hence Pelosi takes office as next in line.
Seems like all the disputed states (disputed in the mind of Trump that is) bar Michigan have announced their results. I very much hope Betfraud are going to face some consequences.
If they keep this market open after Biden has won the actual EC vote, Betfair and any bookies following suit will imo have become a part of Trump's black ops fascist fantasy role play. Which is a very bad look indeed.
Worse than that - they will have destroyed their good name as a reliable place to bet.
Yes. They HAVE to settle it on the EC vote. Last chance saloon for them.
I`ve just complained to BF for a second time - using Nigelb`s wording (below): the winner is more than just projected; the winner has been declared by the electoral college.
Just imagine if the Dems didn’t hold the House then effectively the election could have been stolen for Trump,.
The USA is in a terrible state where one party is becoming fascist and where the polarization makes the Brexit divide in the UK look like a love in .
How would it have been stolen had the GOP taken the House? The electoral votes would have been the same and the certification process would have just been a formality by the VP.
See here, if they had a majority in the House and Senate they could pull this off.
Trump Allies Eye Long-Shot Election Reversal in Congress, Testing Pence
Some House Republicans plan to try to use Congress’s tallying of electoral results on Jan. 6 to tip the election to President Trump. The attempt will put Republicans in a pinch.
Seems like the longest of long shots, especially with several GOP senators already saying they would never countenance such an idea.
No chance they would win but I can see a few Republican Senators looking at 2024 voting for it.
Personally, I think their main aim is to keep the issue in the spotlight rather than fade away, and then hope something comes else out in the same nature as the Hunter Biden investigation. They still wouldn't win but it would tar Biden's Presidency.
I think that's absolutely right.
It's not a zero risk strategy though for the Republicans. Indeed, it's a bit of a "this'll help me in the Primaries" play that may dent the Republicans chances in the midterms. Especially as Biden is likely to get a little bit of an economic tailwind from CV19 fading into the distance.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If it should go to a contigent election, then the House would elect Trump as there would be sufficient Republican-majority state delegations in the new House.
That requires the Democrat House to vote against the electoral college. The senate alone may be able to prevent Biden winning. It cannot force any other outcome, hence Pelosi takes office as next in line.
Each state's delegates cast one bloc vote. I think the GOP have the highest number of states in the House.
The take off, we are going to be back to hitting 25k+ cases a day come the Christmas hall pass, when last time we hit those levels it was lockdown time.
Seems like all the disputed states (disputed in the mind of Trump that is) bar Michigan have announced their results. I very much hope Betfraud are going to face some consequences.
If they keep this market open after Biden has won the actual EC vote, Betfair and any bookies following suit will imo have become a part of Trump's black ops fascist fantasy role play. Which is a very bad look indeed.
Worse than that - they will have destroyed their good name as a reliable place to bet.
Yes. They HAVE to settle it on the EC vote. Last chance saloon for them.
I`ve just complained to BF for a second time - using Nigelb`s wording (below): the winner is more than just projected; the winner has been declared by the electoral college.
Do they declare the winner? I thought that was when the vote was certified in the House.
Just imagine if the Dems didn’t hold the House then effectively the election could have been stolen for Trump,.
The USA is in a terrible state where one party is becoming fascist and where the polarization makes the Brexit divide in the UK look like a love in .
How would it have been stolen had the GOP taken the House? The electoral votes would have been the same and the certification process would have just been a formality by the VP.
See here, if they had a majority in the House and Senate they could pull this off.
Trump Allies Eye Long-Shot Election Reversal in Congress, Testing Pence
Some House Republicans plan to try to use Congress’s tallying of electoral results on Jan. 6 to tip the election to President Trump. The attempt will put Republicans in a pinch.
Seems like the longest of long shots, especially with several GOP senators already saying they would never countenance such an idea.
No chance they would win but I can see a few Republican Senators looking at 2024 voting for it.
Personally, I think their main aim is to keep the issue in the spotlight rather than fade away, and then hope something comes else out in the same nature as the Hunter Biden investigation. They still wouldn't win but it would tar Biden's Presidency.
I think that's absolutely right.
It's not a zero risk strategy though for the Republicans. Indeed, it's a bit of a "this'll help me in the Primaries" play that may dent the Republicans chances in the midterms. Especially as Biden is likely to get a little bit of an economic tailwind from CV19 fading into the distance.
I'm just waitingf for the first Republican to come out and say they have Trump's name tattooed on their penis, that's how much they love the guy. Might be more dignified.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
The problem is, John, that if Betfair are not prepared to settle in accordance with their published rules how do you know who they will settle on and why?
They are making it up as they go along. You could have a very good bet on Nancy Pelosi, for example, only to find they have alighted on a completely different basis for settling.
I see where you are coming from, and you are making sense. Betfair are not. You would be risking money with a capricious market maker.
My advice is that if you try to exploit their unpredictability, keep your stakes small and be prepared for disappointment.
It’s more than making it up as they go along - they have changed wholesale the basis on which they said they’d settle the market. There is zero case for them not to settle tomorrow. The winner is more than just projected; the winner has been declared by the electoral college
They put in their terms that death wouldn't affect the market and then as soon as Trump fell ill they suspended the market.
And the winning party market, after I had smugly warned people to bet on that instead of the Next President market.
Just imagine if the Dems didn’t hold the House then effectively the election could have been stolen for Trump,.
The USA is in a terrible state where one party is becoming fascist and where the polarization makes the Brexit divide in the UK look like a love in .
How would it have been stolen had the GOP taken the House? The electoral votes would have been the same and the certification process would have just been a formality by the VP.
See here, if they had a majority in the House and Senate they could pull this off.
Trump Allies Eye Long-Shot Election Reversal in Congress, Testing Pence
Some House Republicans plan to try to use Congress’s tallying of electoral results on Jan. 6 to tip the election to President Trump. The attempt will put Republicans in a pinch.
Seems like the longest of long shots, especially with several GOP senators already saying they would never countenance such an idea.
No chance they would win but I can see a few Republican Senators looking at 2024 voting for it.
Personally, I think their main aim is to keep the issue in the spotlight rather than fade away, and then hope something comes else out in the same nature as the Hunter Biden investigation. They still wouldn't win but it would tar Biden's Presidency.
I think that's absolutely right.
It's not a zero risk strategy though for the Republicans. Indeed, it's a bit of a "this'll help me in the Primaries" play that may dent the Republicans chances in the midterms. Especially as Biden is likely to get a little bit of an economic tailwind from CV19 fading into the distance.
And with a chunk of educated, professional or self-employed suburbanites who would be natural New England Republicans but who are reviled at this assault on decency and democracy.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If it should go to a contigent election, then the House would elect Trump as there would be sufficient Republican-majority state delegations in the new House.
That requires the Democrat House to vote against the electoral college. The senate alone may be able to prevent Biden winning. It cannot force any other outcome, hence Pelosi takes office as next in line.
I agree that the contingent election is a pretty unlikely outcome. It can only happen if no candidate achieves a majority of the electoral votes accepted and counted. Assuming that there are no faithless electors today that vote for someone other than Biden and Trump, that could only happen in an exact tie, and that could only happen if the two houses uphold objections to exactly the right combination of electoral votes to cause a 50/50 split.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If it should go to a contigent election, then the House would elect Trump as there would be sufficient Republican-majority state delegations in the new House.
That requires the Democrat House to vote against the electoral college. The senate alone may be able to prevent Biden winning. It cannot force any other outcome, hence Pelosi takes office as next in line.
I agree that the contingent election is a pretty unlikely outcome. It can only happen if no candidate achieves a majority of the electoral votes accepted and counted. Assuming that there are no faithless electors today that vote for someone other than Biden and Trump, that could only happen in an exact tie, and that could only happen if the two houses uphold objections to exactly the right combination of electoral votes to cause a 50/50 split.
We are more than halfway there with EC votes, including 5 of the 6 key battlegrounds counted (AZ, NV, GA, PA, WI), and nary a single faithless elector.
There's a huge asymmetry, which the "try weak restrictions and ramp up if they turn out not to work" proponents don't seem to get.
If you over-react, it's bad, but it does reduce the caseload and you can relax a few weeks later. In the timescale we're working to, it's bad, but not that bad.
If you under-react (which BoJo and co have repeatedly done) you don't just have to turn up the restrictions, but you have to turn them up a lot to get the infection rate back to comfortable levels. Back in the spring, 1 week on the upswing took 4 weeks on the downswing to undo.
I know I'm lucky- I get numbers and graphs and exponentials- but we shouldn't still be making these mistakes.
Does anyone think anywhere will move down on Wednesday? If so who is favourite?
Tory seats in tier 3?
Seriously, parts of Kent (dividing the county as per Essex) and some rural counties in the south west. And those parts of the north where case rates are now declining.
Devon is probably staying in Tier 2 because the Royal Devon and Exeter hospital is barely coping.
That`s interesting - where are the hotspots?
Exeter primarily. South Hams and Torbay are very low. Even Plymouth seems to have it under control.
A political consultancy co-founded by the pollster who headed the Conservative party’s general election campaign was given a contract by the government without a competitive tender during the pandemic.
Fleetwood Strategy, which was co-founded this year by Isaac Levido, was given the £124,000 contract by the Cabinet Office in April. The 37-year-old has been credited with playing a large part in securing Boris Johnson his landslide victory.
The government has been accused of giving contracts to companies with links to the Conservative party during the pandemic, drawing criticisms that it has created a “chumocracy”.
The government has also been accused of being unnecessarily secretive after refusing to say which companies have been awarded multi-million-pound Covid-19 contracts after being processed in a high-priority channel for firms with political connections.
Official guidelines stipulate that government contracts should be published 30 days after being awarded. But details of the contract given to Fleetwood were only published on a government website on Friday, six months later than they should have been.
In addition, the Cabinet Office delayed responding to a freedom of information request by the Guardian for a list of contracts that it has given to Fleetwood, claiming that publishing the information could damage commercial interests.
Trump back to within 3 on the EC count. He might just do it!!!
PS This series is my imagination of how the conversation on PB would be going if we did not already know the result.
It would certainly be more interesting if not only were none of the electors bound to be faithful, but that they cast their ballots secretly. Trump would probably not have been elected in 2016 for sure, and there would historically probably been a lot more surprises.
This is incredible stuff. Apparently the population on the rightwing conspiracy sites are genuinely shocked that the Electoral College is not going their way. They have been so brainwashed by what they have been seeing for weeks on the opinion shows on Fox News, Newsmax and OANN, that they genuinely thought that Trump was going to be elected today.
For the first time in months they are meeting reality, and are getting very angry about it (with those who have been lying to them).
There's a huge asymmetry, which the "try weak restrictions and ramp up if they turn out not to work" proponents don't seem to get.
If you over-react, it's bad, but it does reduce the caseload and you can relax a few weeks later. In the timescale we're working to, it's bad, but not that bad.
If you under-react (which BoJo and co have repeatedly done) you don't just have to turn up the restrictions, but you have to turn them up a lot to get the infection rate back to comfortable levels. Back in the spring, 1 week on the upswing took 4 weeks on the downswing to undo.
I know I'm lucky- I get numbers and graphs and exponentials- but we shouldn't still be making these mistakes.
As I said yesterday, I forgive the government for being too slow in March, but we've made the same mistakes several times over.
But at least those close to Boris Johnson are being rewarded.
I would be shocked if Johnson rowed back on Christmas. His libertarian instincts would make cancelling Christmas a big ask.
Who says anything about cancelling it? Smaller, yes. And a good excuse not to have the in-laws around.
I think Boris will stick with the Christmas arrangements although on the face of it, it is not a good idea.
A lot of people will be minimising arrangements, well within the guidance.
I am expecting a lockdown from 28 Dec, harder than the one we have just had, and we may need to keep it in place until end Feb. By end Feb hopefully a large proportion of the 65+ will have had their second vaccine so the exposure to deaths/hospitalisations will be much lower from March.
Also need to consider keeping schools 'online only' for first half term 2021 ie up to late Feb, I know it's not ideal.
Does anyone think anywhere will move down on Wednesday? If so who is favourite?
Tory seats in tier 3?
Seriously, parts of Kent (dividing the county as per Essex) and some rural counties in the south west. And those parts of the north where case rates are now declining.
Actually, the virus has spread rapidly throughout pretty much all of Kent now. That's why the Tory MPs who were complaining bitterly that their areas (Tonbridge, Maidstone, Dover, Fokestone etc.) shouldn't have been in Tier 3 have gone very quiet. The virus has spread down and across from Thanet, Medway and Swale to the more affluent parts.
It already looks like parts, if not all, of Surrey are not too long for Tier 3 - I expect further creep of the Tier 3 zone round the home counties.
In terms of down tiering, I'm not sure whether we will get as much, pre-Christmas, as the numbers in the North might suggest. Liverpool was released by mass testing, and I suspect they'll hold on for that to progress in other areas. Maybe a Lancaster or a Northumberland, but certainly no city centres.
I would be shocked if Johnson rowed back on Christmas. His libertarian instincts would make cancelling Christmas a big ask.
Who says anything about cancelling it? Smaller, yes. And a good excuse not to have the in-laws around.
I think Boris will stick with the Christmas arrangements although on the face of it, it is not a good idea.
A lot of people will be minimising arrangements, well within the guidance.
I am expecting a lockdown from 28 Dec, harder than the one we have just had, and we may need to keep it in place until end Feb. By end Feb hopefully a large proportion of the 65+ will have had their second vaccine so the exposure to deaths/hospitalisations will be much lower from March.
Also need to consider keeping schools 'online only' for first half term 2021 ie up to late Feb, I know it's not ideal.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If it should go to a contigent election, then the House would elect Trump as there would be sufficient Republican-majority state delegations in the new House.
That requires the Democrat House to vote against the electoral college. The senate alone may be able to prevent Biden winning. It cannot force any other outcome, hence Pelosi takes office as next in line.
Each state's delegates cast one bloc vote. I think the GOP have the highest number of states in the House.
I think that only happens in the case that a candidate fails to get to 270, otherwise it's just a normal House session for confirming the Electoral College count.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
The problem is, John, that if Betfair are not prepared to settle in accordance with their published rules how do you know who they will settle on and why?
They are making it up as they go along. You could have a very good bet on Nancy Pelosi, for example, only to find they have alighted on a completely different basis for settling.
I see where you are coming from, and you are making sense. Betfair are not. You would be risking money with a capricious market maker.
My advice is that if you try to exploit their unpredictability, keep your stakes small and be prepared for disappointment.
It’s more than making it up as they go along - they have changed wholesale the basis on which they said they’d settle the market. There is zero case for them not to settle tomorrow. The winner is more than just projected; the winner has been declared by the electoral college
They put in their terms that death wouldn't affect the market and then as soon as Trump fell ill they suspended the market.
And the winning party market, after I had smugly warned people to bet on that instead of the Next President market.
Still furious about that.
Maybe you have nailed it - if there’s a death they will void the market, an every day they wait increases the chances.
Why they would want to void the market rather than settle it before unfortunate death, i don’t know. Maybe they fear that if they pay out and then Biden doesn’t make it to inauguration, there would be a storm of protest, particularly from losers who laid Biden?
The take off, we are going to be back to hitting 25k+ cases a day come the Christmas hall pass, when last time we hit those levels it was lockdown time.
Optimist. We'll probably hit 25k on Wednesday or Thursday when the weekend effect is past and Wales starts reporting its full numbers again.
If you really believed that Betfair have now changed their market to be the actual next president, and were allowed to do so, then surely it wouldn't be possible to make 37 million quid by betting on Nancy Pelosi. She and Kamala Harris would be making up all the spare possibility rather than Trump (I'm assuming that that the House would not permit Trump, which seems more like a trillion to one possibility).
If it should go to a contigent election, then the House would elect Trump as there would be sufficient Republican-majority state delegations in the new House.
That requires the Democrat House to vote against the electoral college. The senate alone may be able to prevent Biden winning. It cannot force any other outcome, hence Pelosi takes office as next in line.
Each state's delegates cast one bloc vote. I think the GOP have the highest number of states in the House.
I think that only happens in the case that a candidate fails to get to 270, otherwise it's just a normal House session for confirming the Electoral College count.
Comments
In the extreme scenario that Trump somehow pulls off a coup (or, indeed, that Pence or Harris are next Presidents) Betfair now face the risk of having to pay everyone out as a winner, depending when they placed their bet, on a £1bn+ market.
Misinformation Mike?
Ivor Cummins?
Allison Pearson?
Evidence and reality don’t dent a Fortress of Ignorant Certainty. Shielded by the Moat of False Positives and a Curtain Wall of Dishonesty.
Given that the actual EC vote is now ongoing, they’ve really not got a leg to stand on.
Do they want to have punters with all their cash tied up, over over the Christmas football fixture list?
Someone with big pockets is surely about to announce they’re sueing Betfair’s arse?
@Andy_Cooke: No - that'd be daft. It's clear that Covid is killing people. Nobody disputes this.
Seriously, parts of Kent (dividing the county as per Essex) and some rural counties in the south west. And those parts of the north where case rates are now declining.
reputable exchange markets to Betfair I can move my business to in future?
Those are the major members of the covid denialist fringe.
Betfair's action seem so detrimental to their reputation you do start looking around for alternative explanation - however weird.
The USA is in a terrible state where one party is becoming fascist and where the polarization makes the Brexit divide in the UK look like a love in .
The problem with both has been lack of liquidity but that may improve now Betfair have shown themselves to be unreliable.
There's an extension for Covid specific side effects at https://coronavirus-yellowcard.mhra.gov.uk/ which presumably didn't take much additional effort.
I should also say that while the UK will benefit from the EU's risk management plans, these in turn will be informed by early data from the UK rollout.
https://twitter.com/BNODesk/status/1338545001039540224?s=19
Trump Allies Eye Long-Shot Election Reversal in Congress, Testing Pence
Some House Republicans plan to try to use Congress’s tallying of electoral results on Jan. 6 to tip the election to President Trump. The attempt will put Republicans in a pinch.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/13/us/politics/trump-allies-election-overturn-congress-pence.html
Just makes me feel like a fool for following the rules when clearly very few other people are.
Every country should already have a generic risk management plan for the roll out of a new vaccine - after all there are vaccination campaigns at least annually. What are the risks associated with this vaccine which might be different from other vaccination roll outs? Most risks, I'd wager, would be the same. The main risks are the vaccine does not work or is not available (which is actually no elevation of risk from the current situation), or it has adverse side effects. What are these - generic ones for which infrastructure is already in place, or side effects specific to COVID?
I am having a hard time thinking of any infrastructure, human behaviours or medical treatments that would be truly unique to COVID outside of the vaccine, and hence of any risk which would be truly unique to COVID and hence for which some contingency plan/treatment does not already exist.
Furthermore, risk management plans are not written in stone. If a new risk is identified, it simply gets incorporated into the next version of the risk management plan
They are making it up as they go along. You could have a very good bet on Nancy Pelosi, for example, only to find they have alighted on a completely different basis for settling.
I see where you are coming from, and you are making sense. Betfair are not. You would be risking money with a capricious market maker.
My advice is that if you try to exploit their unpredictability, keep your stakes small and be prepared for disappointment.
Anyway this is the set of bullet points that the EMA identify as the difference between Emergency Use Authorisation (under which the UK has released the Pfizer vaccine) and the full EMA authorisation:
- info on the group of people to be given the vaccine;
- the vaccine's pharmaceutical quality and purity;
- manufacturing and controls of batches;
- compliance with international requirements for laboratory testing and conduct of clinical trials;
- types of immune responses;
- side effects e.g. with regard to older people, or pregnant women;
- labelling and package leaflet;
- the way risks will be managed and monitored once the vaccine is authorised.
Reference the link above.Personally, I think their main aim is to keep the issue in the spotlight rather than fade away, and then hope something comes else out in the same nature as the Hunter Biden investigation. They still wouldn't win but it would tar Biden's Presidency.
This is why Tegnell took the approach he did in Sweden.
(If you make a killer bet on next pm that has a likely payout in 2024 then there's no great merit on a big gain if your money has a big chance of vanishing beforehand)
Nobody seems to wish to say good things about Smarkets financial strength. (Nobody is saying bad things either).
I'm sticking with BF until I'm sure.
That list identifies hazards. You don't need to calculate the risks to put in place risk controls for them.
There is zero case for them not to settle tomorrow. The winner is more than just projected; the winner has been declared by the electoral college
PS This series is my imagination of how the conversation on PB would be going if we did not already know the result.
It's not a zero risk strategy though for the Republicans. Indeed, it's a bit of a "this'll help me in the Primaries" play that may dent the Republicans chances in the midterms. Especially as Biden is likely to get a little bit of an economic tailwind from CV19 fading into the distance.
And the winning party market, after I had smugly warned people to bet on that instead of the Next President market.
Still furious about that.
If you over-react, it's bad, but it does reduce the caseload and you can relax a few weeks later. In the timescale we're working to, it's bad, but not that bad.
If you under-react (which BoJo and co have repeatedly done) you don't just have to turn up the restrictions, but you have to turn them up a lot to get the infection rate back to comfortable levels. Back in the spring, 1 week on the upswing took 4 weeks on the downswing to undo.
I know I'm lucky- I get numbers and graphs and exponentials- but we shouldn't still be making these mistakes.
A political consultancy co-founded by the pollster who headed the Conservative party’s general election campaign was given a contract by the government without a competitive tender during the pandemic.
Fleetwood Strategy, which was co-founded this year by Isaac Levido, was given the £124,000 contract by the Cabinet Office in April. The 37-year-old has been credited with playing a large part in securing Boris Johnson his landslide victory.
The government has been accused of giving contracts to companies with links to the Conservative party during the pandemic, drawing criticisms that it has created a “chumocracy”.
The government has also been accused of being unnecessarily secretive after refusing to say which companies have been awarded multi-million-pound Covid-19 contracts after being processed in a high-priority channel for firms with political connections.
Official guidelines stipulate that government contracts should be published 30 days after being awarded. But details of the contract given to Fleetwood were only published on a government website on Friday, six months later than they should have been.
In addition, the Cabinet Office delayed responding to a freedom of information request by the Guardian for a list of contracts that it has given to Fleetwood, claiming that publishing the information could damage commercial interests.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/dec/14/cabinet-office-gave-contract-to-firm-co-founded-by-tory-pollster-fleetwood-strategy-isaac-levido
For the first time in months they are meeting reality, and are getting very angry about it (with those who have been lying to them).
But at least those close to Boris Johnson are being rewarded.
A lot of people will be minimising arrangements, well within the guidance.
I am expecting a lockdown from 28 Dec, harder than the one we have just had, and we may need to keep it in place until end Feb. By end Feb hopefully a large proportion of the 65+ will have had their second vaccine so the exposure to deaths/hospitalisations will be much lower from March.
Also need to consider keeping schools 'online only' for first half term 2021 ie up to late Feb, I know it's not ideal.
In terms of down tiering, I'm not sure whether we will get as much, pre-Christmas, as the numbers in the North might suggest. Liverpool was released by mass testing, and I suspect they'll hold on for that to progress in other areas. Maybe a Lancaster or a Northumberland, but certainly no city centres.
Why they would want to void the market rather than settle it before unfortunate death, i don’t know. Maybe they fear that if they pay out and then Biden doesn’t make it to inauguration, there would be a storm of protest, particularly from losers who laid Biden?