Jeez, what have they got against Puerto Rico? That ones simpler, has some bipartisan support and they just voted about it.
Get in line
While they voted for it I've seen a number of comments when looking at Puerto Rico that because the vote was close and the turnout just over 50% there are problems there.
While DC has got political issues the only people who are left to agree is the Senate (and the constitutional changes required to shrink the federal area but that's a different story).
And we are off and running with the media telling everybody how to dodge the rules...
Britons holidaying in Portugal this winter have vowed to skip Boris Johnson's hotel quarantine diktat by travelling home to the UK via the EU, MailOnline can reveal today.
Clever from SKS asking for early vaccination of teachers.
Boris may well have planned that anyway but now will find it challenging to do so.
It's a good idea - if he wasn't, he should do so and thank Keir (and me of course, last week) for the idea. It can't harm Boris to be seen to be listening.
It opens a can of worms. There are lots and lots of people who could have a legitimate claim to special treatment.
If the government agrees to one claim, then suddenly there will be thousands if not millions of others...
Teachers to be done for re-opening schools. Can't see other key workers having a huge objection. Most want their kids to go back to school asap I'd imagine.
It's a bit more complicated though. If you vaccinate the teachers (waiting 21 days after the 2nd jab by the way) you may be protecting the teachers, which is great and important.
What it does nothing to stop is the children mixing and spreading it back to their homes, their parents, their grandparents and all those people in vulnerable groups above the teachers who will die as a result.
Guido has underestimated the impact of Labour's stupid policy grandstanding.
It seems to me that the EU haven't got a contractual leg to stand on so are resorting to emotional blackmail, bluster, low politics and thinly veiled threats instead.
Jeez, what have they got against Puerto Rico? That ones simpler, has some bipartisan support and they just voted about it.
Get in line
Although the Puerto Rico referendum in 2017 was a fairly tight 52:48 affair (well 52.52:47.48 but it looks better with some inaccurate rounding). It's a somewhat complex issue as a majority do not support the status quo, but there is division between statehood within the US and some form of independence.
The state of public opinion in DC itself is a good deal clearer.
Nate Silver makes the correct point that it's just Bayesian versus frequentist statistics. Bayesian stats does have a "gambling" feel to it in that it assigns a prior probability to a hypothesis. But it's probably the better approach to the problem in this case - frequentist caution makes you feel better because you've followed the recipe, but probably doesn't have as good an expected pay-off.
I'm not sure it's even that, because either way you have to assign a prior probability, given the limited supply and the massive urgency. @Foxy wants us to believe that it's less of a gamble to use the second dose on someone already vaccinated than as a first dose for someone else. In other words, he thinks that the efficacy of a single dose (over the few weeks we're talking about) is less than 50% of the efficacy of two doses. He hasn't explained where he gets this prior probability from; there is no data supporting it that I'm aware of. Conversely, there's plenty of data that the single dose efficacy is probably close to that of two doses, again over the few weeks we're talking about. Of course this isn't something for which we can cite full, properly-conducted clinical trials, but that proviso works equally on both sides of the argument.
Hmm, is there not a hidden assumption there? That the effect X of the single dose lasts as well time wise as the effect x + y of the single dose followed up by a second one within three weeks?
Yes. But so what? To argue on the other side, you need to be absolutely sure that the opposite is true, because you are choosing to give another vulnerable person guaranteed zero protection, on the off-chance (unsupported by any firm data, and believed by the experts to be unlikely) that the fall-off in protection of one dose is so big as to negate the advantage of protecting both people.
If that's so then fine. But it has to be considered. It does seem to me that we don't have any data yet over the differential decrease of protection with time over a scale of 1-2 years, which is also important for obvious reasons. Presumably the likelihood of this has been considered.
1-2 years? WTF has that got to do with anything now? Covid will almost certainly be an annual jab thing!
We are more f*cked than a stepmom on Pornhub when our 18 month clearing exemption ends and it isn't permanently renewed.
But those of us in the financial services sector we rank lower than fish.
It's quite amazing really. We had better hope for equivalence.
One of the chaps who is really impacted by this was a heavy backer of Brexit.
He is wistfully saying if you wanted to wilfully destroy the City of London/the UK's financial services pre-eminence then it would look a lot like Boris Johnson's Brexit deal.
There's a side betting market going on here, when will 'anti big bang' day happen, I'm going for the 4th of July 2022, plenty of people have gone for much earlier.
You can see it that's for sure.
I never thought Brexit would be drop on your foot bad for the UK/The City just a gradual diminution of influence and a gradual seeping away of importance. Things are moving a tad quicker than I had thought.
As for the EU/US deal what did we think? That the EU wouldn't be looking to do trade deals with the US also? The difference seems to be, however, that they have managed to do one.
I'm a hope for the best/prepare for the worst kind of guy, but even this is a gutting experience.
I'm genuinely mystified that the party of Margaret Thatcher decided that fish (revenue fuck all) was more important than financial services.
I thought that the pressure would emerge for a good deal for the sector because economical and financial reality would become apparent.
But it looks like the EU are looking for decent alternatives to using the UK, the fact the US is prepared to sign up the EU risk management requirements tells me that EU will be able leverage their size to get what they want.
It was a deal breaker for the UK but not for the Yanks, I suspect the the US will sign up to other things as well to pick up from carcasses of the UK financial services sector.
Starmer Labour and the LDs are increasingly winning over upper middle class professionals.
Evidence?
I'm a white middle class professional, if you count author & journalist, and I'm afraid Labour are losing my affection. Boris is doing a very job on vaccines and that's all that really matters right now and for the remainder of this year.
I asked you for evidence of this alleged movement from the Tories to Labour among the middle classes and professionals. You have provided none. You have given one time point opinion poll which shows the Conservatives continuing to lead.
Usual inaccuracies HY I'm afraid.
In the 2019 GE the Tories led 43% to 33% for Labour with ABC1s and the Tories led 48% to 33% for Labour with C2DEs.
It's the same story - first time was a tragedy, this time is a farce (and rather entertaining).
With Porsche they were at least a recognised financial entity - they were making far more from derivative trading than they were from making cars for years before they engineered the squeeze. Short sellers - in a market that had been created by people failing to take account of counter party risk - failed to take into account counter-party risk when making their trades and didn't comprehend the volume fo available shares to cover the shorts was far, far, far too low.
With GME it is seemingly a horde of retail investors acting in unison creating the squeeze.
The 'absolutely united' is a particularly nice touch. Well that's good to hear. I'm sure that impressive unity will magic up vaccines which would never have been produced if Malta had expressed doubts...
I'm astonished that they just keep digging.
National politicians playing nationalist politics in more or less the same manner some of ours have for the last decade or so over Brexit ? They don't have to be right; they just need their electoral bases to believe that they are. How many of them are going to fact check the contract small print ?
It seems to me that the EU haven't got a contractual leg to stand on so are resorting to emotional blackmail, bluster, low politics and thinly veiled threats instead.
It seems to me that the EU haven't got a contractual leg to stand on so are resorting to emotional blackmail, bluster, low politics and thinly veiled threats instead.
Why wouldn't they, when it's worked so well in the past?
It seems to me that the EU haven't got a contractual leg to stand on so are resorting to emotional blackmail, bluster, low politics and thinly veiled threats instead.
So long as that keeps 52% of the electorate onside...
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
It seems to me that the EU haven't got a contractual leg to stand on so are resorting to emotional blackmail, bluster, low politics and thinly veiled threats instead.
Have you seen the contract?
It's going to be best endeavours as no sane lawyer on AZs side would have allowed anything else.
Jeez, what have they got against Puerto Rico? That ones simpler, has some bipartisan support and they just voted about it.
Get in line
While they voted for it I've seen a number of comments when looking at Puerto Rico that because the vote was close and the turnout just over 50% there are problems there.
While DC has got political issues the only people who are left to agree is the Senate (and the constitutional changes required to shrink the federal area but that's a different story).
I think it is more that there are complex economic and political factors in Puerto Rico. Making it a kind of reverse Brexit. Lots of stuff needs to be thought out and designed.
DC, by contrast could be really, really simple. And it definitely gives the Dems 2 seats in the Senate. Whereas Puerto Rico might split the senate seats, if they get them....
It is quite possible -- if the EU continue to behave like this -- that it magnifies Boris' "success".
Is CCHQ advIsing the EU ?
Because i really cannot think of much that could help Boris more than the EU over-reacting and blocking vaccine exports.
It simultaneously focuses voters' attention on Boris' one big success in the COVID pandemic, as well as one big advantage of Brexit.
And by over-reacting, the EU look like a mobster state.
Why does the EU give a damn how this makes Boris Johnson look? It's a very Anglocentric view of things.
The point is WE give a damn. This is a betting site, and there are elections coming up.
This is politicalbetting.com, not remainerwanking.com.
(And don't ever call me ANGLOcentric, again).
Look, my point was simply that the EU's approach is understandable from their perspective. I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle.
On "Anglo" most dictionaries take the approach that the prefix "Anglo" in normal usage refers to the UK. I think the history is that an Anglo-American would be anyone from English speaking Europe which at the time would be the whole British Isles. Since Ireland separated, it tends to mean the remaining UK. I know that's not the original etymology, but blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please.
"I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle."
I am glad you accept the point I made is correct & directly relevant to the site. Unlike the point you made in return.
"... blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please."
Lots of thing have had centuries of common usage and are now unacceptable. I guess you don't "black up" anymore. I guess you don't use words like y*d or n****** as racial slurs to refer to minorities anymore. We have all moved on.
Referring to Welsh and Scottish people as "Anglo" is unacceptable now. Even in Norfolk.
In a small way -- admittedly -- this kind of behaviour is one of the things that is contributing to our Disunited Kingdom.
Alright, snowflake.
No probs, gammon.
I had gammon for lunch, oddly enough.
One of the great pities of modern political discourse is that it pits my favourite form of cooked meat with my favourite form of precipitation.
It's the same story - first time was a tragedy, this time is a farce (and rather entertaining).
With Porsche they were at least a recognised financial entity - they were making far more from derivative trading than they were from making cars for years before they engineered the squeeze. Short sellers - in a market that had been created by people failing to take account of counter party risk - failed to take into account counter-party risk when making their trades and didn't comprehend the volume fo available shares to cover the shorts was far, far, far too low.
With GME it is seemingly a horde of retail investors acting in unison creating the squeeze.
Which is why it's so entertaining - what should have been a sure oneway bet (beyond the 2020 console release, gaming is going digital so retail is dead) has instead become a problem because some of the short sellers bet rather too much.
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
It seems to me that the EU haven't got a contractual leg to stand on so are resorting to emotional blackmail, bluster, low politics and thinly veiled threats instead.
Have you seen the contract?
I've seen the clause they're citing and how they're trying to stretch its interpretation.
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
How would that come about?
The parliament could bring a vote of no confidence or the national leaders could have a quiet word.
It is quite possible -- if the EU continue to behave like this -- that it magnifies Boris' "success".
Is CCHQ advIsing the EU ?
Because i really cannot think of much that could help Boris more than the EU over-reacting and blocking vaccine exports.
It simultaneously focuses voters' attention on Boris' one big success in the COVID pandemic, as well as one big advantage of Brexit.
And by over-reacting, the EU look like a mobster state.
Why does the EU give a damn how this makes Boris Johnson look? It's a very Anglocentric view of things.
The point is WE give a damn. This is a betting site, and there are elections coming up.
This is politicalbetting.com, not remainerwanking.com.
(And don't ever call me ANGLOcentric, again).
Look, my point was simply that the EU's approach is understandable from their perspective. I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle.
On "Anglo" most dictionaries take the approach that the prefix "Anglo" in normal usage refers to the UK. I think the history is that an Anglo-American would be anyone from English speaking Europe which at the time would be the whole British Isles. Since Ireland separated, it tends to mean the remaining UK. I know that's not the original etymology, but blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please.
"I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle."
I am glad you accept the point I made is correct & directly relevant to the site. Unlike the point you made in return.
"... blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please."
Lots of thing have had centuries of common usage and are now unacceptable. I guess you don't "black up" anymore. I guess you don't use words like y*d or n****** as racial slurs to refer to minorities anymore. We have all moved on.
Referring to Welsh and Scottish people as "Anglo" is unacceptable now. Even in Norfolk.
In a small way -- admittedly -- this kind of behaviour is one of the things that is contributing to our Disunited Kingdom.
Alright, snowflake.
No probs, gammon.
I had gammon for lunch, oddly enough.
One of the great pities of modern political discourse is that it pits my favourite form of cooked meat with my favourite form of precipitation.
That is so LibDemmy ... "my favourite form of precipitation". I love it, love it.
It's the same story - first time was a tragedy, this time is a farce (and rather entertaining).
With Porsche they were at least a recognised financial entity - they were making far more from derivative trading than they were from making cars for years before they engineered the squeeze. Short sellers - in a market that had been created by people failing to take account of counter party risk - failed to take into account counter-party risk when making their trades and didn't comprehend the volume fo available shares to cover the shorts was far, far, far too low.
With GME it is seemingly a horde of retail investors acting in unison creating the squeeze.
Which is why it's so entertaining - what should have been a sure oneway bet (beyond the 2020 console release, gaming is going digital so retail is dead) has instead become a problem because some of the short sellers bet rather too much.
Jeez, what have they got against Puerto Rico? That ones simpler, has some bipartisan support and they just voted about it.
Get in line
While they voted for it I've seen a number of comments when looking at Puerto Rico that because the vote was close and the turnout just over 50% there are problems there.
While DC has got political issues the only people who are left to agree is the Senate (and the constitutional changes required to shrink the federal area but that's a different story).
Turnout around 50 seems pretty normal for America.
We are more f*cked than a stepmom on Pornhub when our 18 month clearing exemption ends and it isn't permanently renewed.
But those of us in the financial services sector we rank lower than fish.
It's quite amazing really. We had better hope for equivalence.
One of the chaps who is really impacted by this was a heavy backer of Brexit.
He is wistfully saying if you wanted to wilfully destroy the City of London/the UK's financial services pre-eminence then it would look a lot like Boris Johnson's Brexit deal.
There's a side betting market going on here, when will 'anti big bang' day happen, I'm going for the 4th of July 2022, plenty of people have gone for much earlier.
You can see it that's for sure.
I never thought Brexit would be drop on your foot bad for the UK/The City just a gradual diminution of influence and a gradual seeping away of importance. Things are moving a tad quicker than I had thought.
As for the EU/US deal what did we think? That the EU wouldn't be looking to do trade deals with the US also? The difference seems to be, however, that they have managed to do one.
I'm a hope for the best/prepare for the worst kind of guy, but even this is a gutting experience.
I'm genuinely mystified that the party of Margaret Thatcher decided that fish (revenue fuck all) was more important than financial services.
I thought that the pressure would emerge for a good deal for the sector because economical and financial reality would become apparent.
But it looks like the EU are looking for decent alternatives to using the UK, the fact the US is prepared to sign up the EU risk management requirements tells me that EU will be able leverage their size to get what they want.
It was a deal breaker for the UK but not for the Yanks, I suspect the the US will sign up to other things as well to pick up from carcasses of the UK financial services sector.
Starmer Labour and the LDs are increasingly winning over upper middle class professionals.
Evidence?
I'm a white middle class professional, if you count author & journalist, and I'm afraid Labour are losing my affection. Boris is doing a very job on vaccines and that's all that really matters right now and for the remainder of this year.
I asked you for evidence of this alleged movement from the Tories to Labour among the middle classes and professionals. You have provided none. You have given one time point opinion poll which shows the Conservatives continuing to lead.
Usual inaccuracies HY I'm afraid.
In the 2019 GE the Tories led 43% to 33% for Labour with ABC1s and the Tories led 48% to 33% for Labour with C2DEs.
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
I agree. But there is about 0.0% possibility of that happening. And the disturbing possibility is that this is the new face of the EU.
It's the same story - first time was a tragedy, this time as farce (and rather entertaining).
There was good one in the Oil & Gas business post 2008. Lots of city wizz kids were looking for new fields to conquer, since some derivatives were somewhat out of favour.
So they though they would get into delivery contracts. So they bought at what seemed low low prices - from the specialist trading outfits. Then learnt all about physical delivery contracts.... the very hard way...
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
Never thought I'd see that.
The reaction has been the sort of thing governments rightly get pilloried about by oppositions.
They could have made their criticisms and unhappiness clear without the distractions, leaks and accusations.
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
It would only be interesting, indeed astonishing, if such caveats weren't in the contract.
It is completely inconceivable that the contract wouldn't include lots of such caveats. There is absolutely no way AZ would have given a firm commitment on delivery dates for a brand-new vaccine, involving new production facilities and dependent on other suppliers who themselves were also doing things for the first time, all in a super-fast timescale.
As AZ CEO has continually stated the contract is based on best endeavors.
I'm actually surprised how polite he is being in public considering the games the EU seem to be playing.
I don't know what the EU think they're playing at. They really are in a negotiation where AZ hold all the cards. After all, if the EU get too bolshie AZ have the option to simply walk away from the contract, close their European factory and concentrate on other markets.
And there is exactly feck all the EU can do about it.
So the 'win' here for the EU is they accept a lower delivery than they want, and the lose is that they get none at all.
Wrong. The EU is one of the largest markets for pharmaceuticals in the world. That gives them a lot of muscle. AZ will not want to antagonise them more than necessary, so no, AZ do not hold all the cards, far from it.
So - just to be clear - the EU might ban AZ from operating in the EU altogether if they decide to abrogate a contract?
Which would cause no medicine shortages of any kind, I trust?
The EU are behaving like complete fools. It's like watching the DUP over Theresa May's deal - only worse, because you expect the DUP to behave like idiots.
The EU feels that AZ have legged them over. So they are making a fuss. A resolution will be found that puts the EU in a better position than if they had not made a fuss. This is what I predict. Bet I'm right.
At the detriment to who?
I fear it might be you, Rob. But let's hope not.
It was a legitimate question. The EU are seeking to divert supplies rightfully destined for the UK.
Not really. That's a simplistic and jaundiced view. They are "rightfully" seeking to reduce their shortfall. In general, with fixed vaccine supply, every shot someone has means somebody else did not have it. Why are we diverting jabs from Italy? Why is Israel diverting jabs from us? Etc. It all depends on the contracts, the money, the moral view, the WHO, the balance of power, the politics etc etc. Bottom line is as I summarized and people should stop sanctimoniously moaning unless and until something that warrants it occurs. Which it hasn't yet. All that's happening is a frenzy of europhobes mutually wanking each other off and wallowing in europhobia. I'm finding it infantile and tedious.
"Rightfully"?
The EU signed their contracts three months late. It isn't europhobia to point this out.
Had Johnson's Government signed contracts three months after the EU and the UK was struggling as a result then would it be Anglophobia to point that out?
Just mimicking OP's equally 'arguable' use of the word. And yes, I'm afraid this is tickling up the europhobia of europhobes something rotten.
But anyway, thanks for the contribution. I maintain a list of your specialisms - you know how I am with lists - and I will now add 'big ticket pharma contracts' to it.
If you add 'ability to read' then you can make a shorter list.
Its amazing what you can pick up with an ability to read.
I sense a "well sourced and truthful" (iyo) article which just happens to support your view. Not what we are looking for. What we want, remember, is an example of a piece of quality journalism which challenges your view on something. Tick tock ...
I've mentioned it before but when this piece was shared here originally I wrote at the time that it really challenged a few of my views.
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
Fair play to you william, it is a pity other supporters of the EU are not as honest
Jeez, what have they got against Puerto Rico? That ones simpler, has some bipartisan support and they just voted about it.
Get in line
While they voted for it I've seen a number of comments when looking at Puerto Rico that because the vote was close and the turnout just over 50% there are problems there.
While DC has got political issues the only people who are left to agree is the Senate (and the constitutional changes required to shrink the federal area but that's a different story).
I think it is more that there are complex economic and political factors in Puerto Rico. Making it a kind of reverse Brexit. Lots of stuff needs to be thought out and designed.
DC, by contrast could be really, really simple. And it definitely gives the Dems 2 seats in the Senate. Whereas Puerto Rico might split the senate seats, if they get them....
Yes, the current Resident Commissioner of Puerto Rico (basically non-voting member of House of Representatives) is part of the Republican caucus.
Although it's complex as they have a different set of parties and her predecessor was in the Democratic caucus despite being the same party (the party is defined by its support for statehood rather than traditional US lines). They are probably wise to send a Republican-leaning person to make the statehood case but probably wouldn't if admitted.
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
It is quite possible -- if the EU continue to behave like this -- that it magnifies Boris' "success".
Is CCHQ advIsing the EU ?
Because i really cannot think of much that could help Boris more than the EU over-reacting and blocking vaccine exports.
It simultaneously focuses voters' attention on Boris' one big success in the COVID pandemic, as well as one big advantage of Brexit.
And by over-reacting, the EU look like a mobster state.
Why does the EU give a damn how this makes Boris Johnson look? It's a very Anglocentric view of things.
The point is WE give a damn. This is a betting site, and there are elections coming up.
This is politicalbetting.com, not remainerwanking.com.
(And don't ever call me ANGLOcentric, again).
Look, my point was simply that the EU's approach is understandable from their perspective. I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle.
On "Anglo" most dictionaries take the approach that the prefix "Anglo" in normal usage refers to the UK. I think the history is that an Anglo-American would be anyone from English speaking Europe which at the time would be the whole British Isles. Since Ireland separated, it tends to mean the remaining UK. I know that's not the original etymology, but blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please.
"I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle."
I am glad you accept the point I made is correct & directly relevant to the site. Unlike the point you made in return.
"... blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please."
Lots of thing have had centuries of common usage and are now unacceptable. I guess you don't "black up" anymore. I guess you don't use words like y*d or n****** as racial slurs to refer to minorities anymore. We have all moved on.
Referring to Welsh and Scottish people as "Anglo" is unacceptable now. Even in Norfolk.
In a small way -- admittedly -- this kind of behaviour is one of the things that is contributing to our Disunited Kingdom.
Alright, snowflake.
No probs, gammon.
I had gammon for lunch, oddly enough.
One of the great pities of modern political discourse is that it pits my favourite form of cooked meat with my favourite form of precipitation.
That is so LibDemmy ... "my favourite form of precipitation". I love it, love it.
Jeez, what have they got against Puerto Rico? That ones simpler, has some bipartisan support and they just voted about it.
Get in line
Although the Puerto Rico referendum in 2017 was a fairly tight 52:48 affair (well 52.52:47.48 but it looks better with some inaccurate rounding). It's a somewhat complex issue as a majority do not support the status quo, but there is division between statehood within the US and some form of independence.
The state of public opinion in DC itself is a good deal clearer.
Sure but they voted in 2020 too and it doesnt seem like US institutions stop doing things just because the public is pretty divided, if one side has a majority.
It's the same story - first time was a tragedy, this time as farce (and rather entertaining).
There was good one in the Oil & Gas business post 2008. Lots of city wizz kids were looking for new fields to conquer, since some derivatives were somewhat out of favour.
So they though they would get into delivery contracts. So they bought at what seemed low low prices - from the specialist trading outfits. Then learnt all about physical delivery contracts.... the very hard way...
Wasn't that how a lot of Essex "Boys" made similar mega fortunes last year.
It's the same story - first time was a tragedy, this time is a farce (and rather entertaining).
With Porsche they were at least a recognised financial entity - they were making far more from derivative trading than they were from making cars for years before they engineered the squeeze. Short sellers - in a market that had been created by people failing to take account of counter party risk - failed to take into account counter-party risk when making their trades and didn't comprehend the volume fo available shares to cover the shorts was far, far, far too low.
With GME it is seemingly a horde of retail investors acting in unison creating the squeeze.
Which is why it's so entertaining - what should have been a sure oneway bet (beyond the 2020 console release, gaming is going digital so retail is dead) has instead become a problem because some of the short sellers bet rather too much.
Can you please explain what this is all about?
Aside: The other day R5 was talking about a film on the "Flash Crash" bedroom trader from Hounslow whom the US went after a few years ago. Sounds interesting.
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
Credit to you william.
Yes, No one doubts Williams attachment to the EU cause - but he can see how this looks.
It is quite possible -- if the EU continue to behave like this -- that it magnifies Boris' "success".
Is CCHQ advIsing the EU ?
Because i really cannot think of much that could help Boris more than the EU over-reacting and blocking vaccine exports.
It simultaneously focuses voters' attention on Boris' one big success in the COVID pandemic, as well as one big advantage of Brexit.
And by over-reacting, the EU look like a mobster state.
Why does the EU give a damn how this makes Boris Johnson look? It's a very Anglocentric view of things.
The point is WE give a damn. This is a betting site, and there are elections coming up.
This is politicalbetting.com, not remainerwanking.com.
(And don't ever call me ANGLOcentric, again).
Look, my point was simply that the EU's approach is understandable from their perspective. I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle.
On "Anglo" most dictionaries take the approach that the prefix "Anglo" in normal usage refers to the UK. I think the history is that an Anglo-American would be anyone from English speaking Europe which at the time would be the whole British Isles. Since Ireland separated, it tends to mean the remaining UK. I know that's not the original etymology, but blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please.
"I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle."
I am glad you accept the point I made is correct & directly relevant to the site. Unlike the point you made in return.
"... blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please."
Lots of thing have had centuries of common usage and are now unacceptable. I guess you don't "black up" anymore. I guess you don't use words like y*d or n****** as racial slurs to refer to minorities anymore. We have all moved on.
Referring to Welsh and Scottish people as "Anglo" is unacceptable now. Even in Norfolk.
In a small way -- admittedly -- this kind of behaviour is one of the things that is contributing to our Disunited Kingdom.
Alright, snowflake.
No probs, gammon.
I had gammon for lunch, oddly enough.
One of the great pities of modern political discourse is that it pits my favourite form of cooked meat with my favourite form of precipitation.
That is so LibDemmy ... "my favourite form of precipitation". I love it, love it.
What is your favourite inert gas ?
(Apart from Ed Davey, natch)
"Noble gas" is the preferred, and more appropriate, term.
"Inert gas" may still be an acceptable term in some less advanced parts of Wales, but it's something we find deeply offensive and you really need to move into the 21st century and stop this sort of gratuitous comment.
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
How would that come about?
The parliament could bring a vote of no confidence or the national leaders could have a quiet word.
That effectively means Merkel has to be on board, doesn't it? Isn't she one of Merkel's proteges?
I like the conflation of 'moral, societal and contractual'...
But I don't think that displays delusion - it illustrates exactly what Kyriakides is trying to do.
Yes, that seemed a telling phrase. Seemed like a possible admission they know contractually AZ are covered in this situation, but that they not absolved morally and focusing the public on that.
Which is entirely irrelevant to the accusations on contract.
It's the same story - first time was a tragedy, this time as farce (and rather entertaining).
There was good one in the Oil & Gas business post 2008. Lots of city wizz kids were looking for new fields to conquer, since some derivatives were somewhat out of favour.
So they though they would get into delivery contracts. So they bought at what seemed low low prices - from the specialist trading outfits. Then learnt all about physical delivery contracts.... the very hard way...
Wasn't that how a lot of Essex "Boys" made similar mega fortunes last year.
I haven't followed that market more recently. The 2008 thing was told to me by some friends who worked in the trading outfit at the oil major I used to work for. The sold the contracts low, knowing that the only storage available at the locations in question was owned by oil major in question.....
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
If they didn't sack Juncker over Selmayr, they're not going to sack VDL and Kyriakides for trying to get supplies of life saving vaccines due to an initial timetabling cockup.
As well as lots of caveats around 'best endeavours, I bet there are two further conditions in the AZ-EU contract:
1. 'Subject to approval by the EMA', which would be an interesting one to bring into the mix.
2. A clause stipulating that AZ won't favour other clients over the EU. The EU might think this gives them the right to dip into our supplies, but I doubt whether a proper reading of the various contracts would support that, assuming the AZ lawyers know what they are doing (which is a very, very good assumption).
I mean it is a bunch of half-rate politicians that couldn't make it in national politics vs. lawyers that probably charge thousands an hour.
Von der Leyen is leagues above corporate lawyer material.
Very amusing. 😂
She'd make partner at Freshfields, no problem. People overestimate how hard it is to be successful in the private sector professional services industry. It's not that hard at all. Even I managed it before "the fall".
I like the conflation of 'moral, societal and contractual'...
But I don't think that displays delusion - it illustrates exactly what Kyriakides is trying to do.
Yep, it's just bluster and hot air. Unedifying, but I imagine there would be many on this side of the channel expressing similar thoughts if we'd been slow in vaccine procurement, instead. I can imagine Johnson demanding that our British vaccines not be exported to the the EU even if they'd signed the contract first. Farage certainly, Rees-Mogg, very likely.
May be effective too, it will likely ensure that AZN are very careful that best efforts (if that's the wording) are indeed demonstrably made everywhere. I'm sure we've all had unreasonable clients/bosses demanding unreasonable things and we huff and puff, but if they're important enough then we try a bit harder to make them shut up, or at least give them some kind of promise we were planning to deliver anyway so that they think they've achieved something. If AZN announce that they will manage x deliveries by x date - even if already planned/expected - then that's politically useful to those doing the demanding.
I don't like it and I don't think it reflects very well on those making the fuss, but that's beside the point, really.
It seems to me that the EU haven't got a contractual leg to stand on so are resorting to emotional blackmail, bluster, low politics and thinly veiled threats instead.
I think Ursula Von Der Leyen and Stella Kyriakides both need to lose their jobs over this. The Commission had a totally ill-conceived strategy and the attempt to shift the blame is bringing the EU into disrepute.
I agree. But there is about 0.0% possibility of that happening. And the disturbing possibility is that this is the new face of the EU.
Jeez, what have they got against Puerto Rico? That ones simpler, has some bipartisan support and they just voted about it.
Get in line
Although the Puerto Rico referendum in 2017 was a fairly tight 52:48 affair (well 52.52:47.48 but it looks better with some inaccurate rounding). It's a somewhat complex issue as a majority do not support the status quo, but there is division between statehood within the US and some form of independence.
The state of public opinion in DC itself is a good deal clearer.
Sure but they voted in 2020 too and it doesnt seem like US institutions stop doing things just because the public is pretty divided, if one side has a majority.
I agree they should move ahead. But the point has been made that there are important respects in which it isn't "simpler" than DC as you said. The fact that a substantial minority of Puerto Ricans are against it is part of that. Another element, as others have mentioned, is the degree of economic and political integration.
As well as lots of caveats around 'best endeavours, I bet there are two further conditions in the AZ-EU contract:
1. 'Subject to approval by the EMA', which would be an interesting one to bring into the mix.
2. A clause stipulating that AZ won't favour other clients over the EU. The EU might think this gives them the right to dip into our supplies, but I doubt whether a proper reading of the various contracts would support that, assuming the AZ lawyers know what they are doing (which is a very, very good assumption).
I mean it is a bunch of half-rate politicians that couldn't make it in national politics vs. lawyers that probably charge thousands an hour.
Von der Leyen is leagues above corporate lawyer material.
Very amusing. 😂
She'd make partner at Freshfields, no problem. People overestimate how hard it is to be successful in the private sector professional services industry. It's not that hard at all. Even I managed it before "the fall".
From my experience from the outside of places like that she'd fit in admirably. Incompetent at any actual job but very good at political maneuvering to ensure that she comes out on top.
It is quite possible -- if the EU continue to behave like this -- that it magnifies Boris' "success".
Is CCHQ advIsing the EU ?
Because i really cannot think of much that could help Boris more than the EU over-reacting and blocking vaccine exports.
It simultaneously focuses voters' attention on Boris' one big success in the COVID pandemic, as well as one big advantage of Brexit.
And by over-reacting, the EU look like a mobster state.
Why does the EU give a damn how this makes Boris Johnson look? It's a very Anglocentric view of things.
The point is WE give a damn. This is a betting site, and there are elections coming up.
This is politicalbetting.com, not remainerwanking.com.
(And don't ever call me ANGLOcentric, again).
Look, my point was simply that the EU's approach is understandable from their perspective. I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle.
On "Anglo" most dictionaries take the approach that the prefix "Anglo" in normal usage refers to the UK. I think the history is that an Anglo-American would be anyone from English speaking Europe which at the time would be the whole British Isles. Since Ireland separated, it tends to mean the remaining UK. I know that's not the original etymology, but blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please.
"I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle."
I am glad you accept the point I made is correct & directly relevant to the site. Unlike the point you made in return.
"... blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please."
Lots of thing have had centuries of common usage and are now unacceptable. I guess you don't "black up" anymore. I guess you don't use words like y*d or n****** as racial slurs to refer to minorities anymore. We have all moved on.
Referring to Welsh and Scottish people as "Anglo" is unacceptable now. Even in Norfolk.
In a small way -- admittedly -- this kind of behaviour is one of the things that is contributing to our Disunited Kingdom.
Alright, snowflake.
Not snowflakey - it is actually quite a problem. The existence of "Anglo-Scottish" shows that the anglo- prefix is actually highly ambiguous, and unhelpfully so given that the difference between UK and "England" is actually a highly salient one these days, and most certainly in the context of the original usage which was (a) about Mr Johnson and (b) given that (for instance) Scotland is very pro-EU. So your original comment could be read in two ways, both with very different meanings. We need a new prefix!
As well as lots of caveats around 'best endeavours, I bet there are two further conditions in the AZ-EU contract:
1. 'Subject to approval by the EMA', which would be an interesting one to bring into the mix.
2. A clause stipulating that AZ won't favour other clients over the EU. The EU might think this gives them the right to dip into our supplies, but I doubt whether a proper reading of the various contracts would support that, assuming the AZ lawyers know what they are doing (which is a very, very good assumption).
I mean it is a bunch of half-rate politicians that couldn't make it in national politics vs. lawyers that probably charge thousands an hour.
Von der Leyen is leagues above corporate lawyer material.
Very amusing. 😂
She'd make partner at Freshfields, no problem. People overestimate how hard it is to be successful in the private sector professional services industry. It's not that hard at all. Even I managed it before "the fall".
Is your point that it mostly requires networking skills and hard work rather than technical ability, or that the individuals who get to the top just aren't that impressive generally?
On the former, I'd agree with you, but that still means VdL is out of her depth against AZ's in-house team plus whatever advisors they have. On the latter, I tend to disagree.
It's the same story - first time was a tragedy, this time is a farce (and rather entertaining).
With Porsche they were at least a recognised financial entity - they were making far more from derivative trading than they were from making cars for years before they engineered the squeeze. Short sellers - in a market that had been created by people failing to take account of counter party risk - failed to take into account counter-party risk when making their trades and didn't comprehend the volume fo available shares to cover the shorts was far, far, far too low.
With GME it is seemingly a horde of retail investors acting in unison creating the squeeze.
Which is why it's so entertaining - what should have been a sure oneway bet (beyond the 2020 console release, gaming is going digital so retail is dead) has instead become a problem because some of the short sellers bet rather too much.
The constant pecking away is draining to witness. I'm sure it's fine in a courtroom where Sir Keir Starmer cut his teeth but it makes them seem like a bunch of whingebags. The latest two examples of irritating grandstanding are:
1. Seal all the borders. (Runaway!) As the vaccine rollout is going so well this is not the time to seal up the whole country. Last year? Maybe. Now? Probably not really necessary.
2. Jab all teachers now (Instead of the vulnerable who are more likely to die).
It's tiresome. It's also really stupid: see point 2. They don't seem to understand that we're all growing weary of lockdowns and we want to move on. We know, despite most of the media, that we're on course to suppress this virus thanks to a stunning vaccine success. We're talking weeks before we should be able to ease up. This isn't the right time to throw a pall over the country.
I want to see Sir Keir take the initiative with groundbreaking policies to take this country forward for the future instead of peck peck pecking at Boris Johnson's heels.
I sense no appetite (other than yours) for this right now. It's pandemic pandemic pandemic. If he went off on that tack you'd be less weary but the rest of the counrty would be pissed off. It's a bad swap.
According to the article, it's actually said that vaccines made in the UK should form part of the vaccines that the EU receives - that's not quite the same thing. If AZN is meeting it's (best efforts, presumably) contractual commitments to the UK then it would be expected that excess capacity would be used to meet contractual commitments elsewhere. It's surely inevitable that the UK factories will be sending some to the EU, at least in time, as the EU-based Pfizer factories are sending vaccines to us (as we have a contract to receive those).
Did we know that we are now extending 2nd doses of AZN beyond 12 weeks from today?
Nobody had the AZN dose 12 weeks ago.
But if it means more people can get a highly efficacious first dose then that sounds entirely good news. Did you read what the AZN CEO had to say on this subject?
According to the article, it's actually said that vaccines made in the UK should form part of the vaccines that the EU receives - that's not quite the same thing. If AZN is meeting it's (best efforts, presumably) contractual commitments to the UK then it would be expected that excess capacity would be used to meet contractual commitments elsewhere. It's surely inevitable that the UK factories will be sending some to the EU, at least in time, as the EU-based Pfizer factories are sending vaccines to us (as we have a contract to receive those).
“The UK agreement was reached in June, three months before the European one. As you could imagine, the UK government said the supply coming out of the UK supply chain would go to the UK first. Basically, that's how it is. In the EU agreement it is mentioned that the manufacturing sites in the UK were an option for Europe, but only later. But we're moving very quickly, the supply in the UK is very rapid. The government is vaccinating 2.5 million people a week, about 500,000 a day, our vaccine supply is growing quickly. As soon as we have reached a sufficient number of vaccinations in the UK, we will be able to use that site to help Europe as well. But the contract with the UK was signed first and the UK, of course, said “you supply us first”, and this is fair enough. This vaccine was developed with the UK government, Oxford and with us as well. As soon as we can, we'll help the EU. I mean, as a company we are half Swedish and half British. In fact, we're global, of course, but we are European as much as we are British".
According to the article, it's actually said that vaccines made in the UK should form part of the vaccines that the EU receives - that's not quite the same thing. If AZN is meeting it's (best efforts, presumably) contractual commitments to the UK then it would be expected that excess capacity would be used to meet contractual commitments elsewhere. It's surely inevitable that the UK factories will be sending some to the EU, at least in time, as the EU-based Pfizer factories are sending vaccines to us (as we have a contract to receive those).
AZN aren't meeting their UK commitments at the moment. No where near. They were supposed to deliver 4m doses last week, they delivered 2m. And all of this is way behind the 30m they promised months ago.
Jeez, what have they got against Puerto Rico? That ones simpler, has some bipartisan support and they just voted about it.
Get in line
Although the Puerto Rico referendum in 2017 was a fairly tight 52:48 affair (well 52.52:47.48 but it looks better with some inaccurate rounding). It's a somewhat complex issue as a majority do not support the status quo, but there is division between statehood within the US and some form of independence.
The state of public opinion in DC itself is a good deal clearer.
Sure but they voted in 2020 too and it doesnt seem like US institutions stop doing things just because the public is pretty divided, if one side has a majority.
I agree they should move ahead. But the point has been made that there are important respects in which it isn't "simpler" than DC as you said. The fact that a substantial minority of Puerto Ricans are against it is part of that. Another element, as others have mentioned, is the degree of economic and political integration.
As well as lots of caveats around 'best endeavours, I bet there are two further conditions in the AZ-EU contract:
1. 'Subject to approval by the EMA', which would be an interesting one to bring into the mix.
2. A clause stipulating that AZ won't favour other clients over the EU. The EU might think this gives them the right to dip into our supplies, but I doubt whether a proper reading of the various contracts would support that, assuming the AZ lawyers know what they are doing (which is a very, very good assumption).
I mean it is a bunch of half-rate politicians that couldn't make it in national politics vs. lawyers that probably charge thousands an hour.
Von der Leyen is leagues above corporate lawyer material.
Very amusing. 😂
She'd make partner at Freshfields, no problem. People overestimate how hard it is to be successful in the private sector professional services industry. It's not that hard at all. Even I managed it before "the fall".
It is quite possible -- if the EU continue to behave like this -- that it magnifies Boris' "success".
Is CCHQ advIsing the EU ?
Because i really cannot think of much that could help Boris more than the EU over-reacting and blocking vaccine exports.
It simultaneously focuses voters' attention on Boris' one big success in the COVID pandemic, as well as one big advantage of Brexit.
And by over-reacting, the EU look like a mobster state.
Why does the EU give a damn how this makes Boris Johnson look? It's a very Anglocentric view of things.
The point is WE give a damn. This is a betting site, and there are elections coming up.
This is politicalbetting.com, not remainerwanking.com.
(And don't ever call me ANGLOcentric, again).
Look, my point was simply that the EU's approach is understandable from their perspective. I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle.
On "Anglo" most dictionaries take the approach that the prefix "Anglo" in normal usage refers to the UK. I think the history is that an Anglo-American would be anyone from English speaking Europe which at the time would be the whole British Isles. Since Ireland separated, it tends to mean the remaining UK. I know that's not the original etymology, but blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please.
"I agree it tends to help Johnson politically, looked at from a betting angle."
I am glad you accept the point I made is correct & directly relevant to the site. Unlike the point you made in return.
"... blame centuries of common usage rather than me, please."
Lots of thing have had centuries of common usage and are now unacceptable. I guess you don't "black up" anymore. I guess you don't use words like y*d or n****** as racial slurs to refer to minorities anymore. We have all moved on.
Referring to Welsh and Scottish people as "Anglo" is unacceptable now. Even in Norfolk.
In a small way -- admittedly -- this kind of behaviour is one of the things that is contributing to our Disunited Kingdom.
Alright, snowflake.
Not snowflakey - it is actually quite a problem. The existence of "Anglo-Scottish" shows that the anglo- prefix is actually highly ambiguous, and unhelpfully so given that the difference between UK and "England" is actually a highly salient one these days, and most certainly in the context of the original usage which was (a) about Mr Johnson and (b) given that (for instance) Scotland is very pro-EU. So your original comment could be read in two ways, both with very different meanings. We need a new prefix!
"Anglo" to anyone with a brain cell = England
Surely the only anglos are @SirNorfolkPassmore, his cousin SirSuffolkPassmore, and their fellow Angles - the North folk and the South folk?
According to the article, it's actually said that vaccines made in the UK should form part of the vaccines that the EU receives - that's not quite the same thing. If AZN is meeting it's (best efforts, presumably) contractual commitments to the UK then it would be expected that excess capacity would be used to meet contractual commitments elsewhere. It's surely inevitable that the UK factories will be sending some to the EU, at least in time, as the EU-based Pfizer factories are sending vaccines to us (as we have a contract to receive those).
The vaccine approval from the EMA will include the supply chain (where it's made/packed) It's unlikely AstraZeneca has submitted the UK plants initially - so UK made vaccine won't be approved for use in the EU. You might expect the Health Commissioner to know that, but then again.....
We're guessing here, but I'd be extremely surprised if the agreement didn't cover applying for approval explicitly, and in any event "best endeavours" would certainly exclude a decision to apply for approval everywhere but the EU. I'd also be extremely surprised if AZ decided to forgo all sales in a large market.
There are reasons AZ may win its tussle. But that particular argument is wrong on its face.
According to the article, it's actually said that vaccines made in the UK should form part of the vaccines that the EU receives - that's not quite the same thing. If AZN is meeting it's (best efforts, presumably) contractual commitments to the UK then it would be expected that excess capacity would be used to meet contractual commitments elsewhere. It's surely inevitable that the UK factories will be sending some to the EU, at least in time, as the EU-based Pfizer factories are sending vaccines to us (as we have a contract to receive those).
The boxes should be sent with Union Jacks and "Gift from the people of the United Kingdom" on them, just as the EU ensures its flag is all over anything it does.
This is the most ridiculous way to trash your brand
The EU's brand or AstraZeneca's brand?
The latters is already trashed isn't it?
Why? Don't tell me you still believe that 8% nonsense you were gleefully spouting earlier.
I didnt spout anything I just asked for clarity and speculated we were up shit creek if the reports were true.
What % is right for AZN RobD do tell. Do you believe AZN has enhanced their reputation or damaged it I think the latter
For Pfizer its all pretty straight forward for AZN the opposite unless you can point me to an official source that gives effectiveness
lol, just asking for clarity? Go back and read your own posts.
They were saying just today it is near 100% effective at preventing serious cases that require hospitilisation. I don't see any reason to think that their reputation has already been trashed.
We are more f*cked than a stepmom on Pornhub when our 18 month clearing exemption ends and it isn't permanently renewed.
But those of us in the financial services sector we rank lower than fish.
It's quite amazing really. We had better hope for equivalence.
One of the chaps who is really impacted by this was a heavy backer of Brexit.
He is wistfully saying if you wanted to wilfully destroy the City of London/the UK's financial services pre-eminence then it would look a lot like Boris Johnson's Brexit deal.
There's a side betting market going on here, when will 'anti big bang' day happen, I'm going for the 4th of July 2022, plenty of people have gone for much earlier.
You can see it that's for sure.
I never thought Brexit would be drop on your foot bad for the UK/The City just a gradual diminution of influence and a gradual seeping away of importance. Things are moving a tad quicker than I had thought.
As for the EU/US deal what did we think? That the EU wouldn't be looking to do trade deals with the US also? The difference seems to be, however, that they have managed to do one.
I'm a hope for the best/prepare for the worst kind of guy, but even this is a gutting experience.
I'm genuinely mystified that the party of Margaret Thatcher decided that fish (revenue fuck all) was more important than financial services.
I thought that the pressure would emerge for a good deal for the sector because economical and financial reality would become apparent.
But it looks like the EU are looking for decent alternatives to using the UK, the fact the US is prepared to sign up the EU risk management requirements tells me that EU will be able leverage their size to get what they want.
It was a deal breaker for the UK but not for the Yanks, I suspect the the US will sign up to other things as well to pick up from carcasses of the UK financial services sector.
It's blooming obvious but equally only in retrospect (even if retrospect is 2ms after the announcement).
The US can accept a lot if the rules don't impact their current business and there is extra money to be made from it.
And in one single move London moves than equality with New York to equality with New Jersey (and other back office locations).
I think what will happen is plenty of UK financial institutions will set up US based subsidiaries, if they don't already have them, and book the trades in the US, so the profits and transactions taxes move from the UK to the US and to a lesser extent the EU.
As an aside, next Monday and Tuesday we have a webinar scheduled which is talking about disastrous thing for the City of London/financial services sector that has fallen under the radar.
With us withdrawing from lots of data and intelligence sharing agreements, London might be unable to deal with countries outside the EU as their companies will need proper audit trails and the ability to spot/deal with financial crimes.
There's not enough dodgy Russians and Sheikhs to make up for that potential revenue loss.
That's right. Smaller Good City. Bigger Bad City. Lose/Lose. I hate what we're doing. So would most Leavers if they understood it. And why are we doing it? To serve the personal political ambitions of one man. Boris Johnson. It's an absolute scandal. It's a sin.
We're guessing here, but I'd be extremely surprised if the agreement didn't cover applying for approval explicitly, and in any event "best endeavours" would certainly exclude a decision to apply for approval everywhere but the EU. I'd also be extremely surprised if AZ decided to forgo all sales in a large market.
There are reasons AZ may win its tussle. But that particular argument is wrong on its face.
I think it a joke - taking on the EU at "who can be the biggest tosser?"
According to the article, it's actually said that vaccines made in the UK should form part of the vaccines that the EU receives - that's not quite the same thing. If AZN is meeting it's (best efforts, presumably) contractual commitments to the UK then it would be expected that excess capacity would be used to meet contractual commitments elsewhere. It's surely inevitable that the UK factories will be sending some to the EU, at least in time, as the EU-based Pfizer factories are sending vaccines to us (as we have a contract to receive those).
AZN aren't meeting their UK commitments at the moment. No where near. They were supposed to deliver 4m doses last week, they delivered 2m. And all of this is way behind the 30m they promised months ago.
And we were pretty mad about it too. Its surprising though that serious people are at the toddler phase of anger response.
Hardly worth AZ getting too puffy in response with a body like the EU, or any government, but after achieving great things the companies with their vaccines probably feel hard done by despite production failings.
Comments
While DC has got political issues the only people who are left to agree is the Senate (and the constitutional changes required to shrink the federal area but that's a different story).
Britons holidaying in Portugal this winter have vowed to skip Boris Johnson's hotel quarantine diktat by travelling home to the UK via the EU, MailOnline can reveal today.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9192661/Holidaymakers-vow-new-quarantine-rules-driving-Portugal-Spain.html
Ciao
The state of public opinion in DC itself is a good deal clearer.
So there has been a clear shift from the Tories to Labour now Corbyn has been replaced by Starmer with ABC1s but little change with C2DEs
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/12/17/how-britain-voted-2019-general-election
With GME it is seemingly a horde of retail investors acting in unison creating the squeeze.
They don't have to be right; they just need their electoral bases to believe that they are. How many of them are going to fact check the contract small print ?
DC, by contrast could be really, really simple. And it definitely gives the Dems 2 seats in the Senate. Whereas Puerto Rico might split the senate seats, if they get them....
One of the great pities of modern political discourse is that it pits my favourite form of cooked meat with my favourite form of precipitation.
Their reaction and argument speaks for itself.
Shit just got real.
(PS. Good on you. I agree entirely.)
What is your favourite inert gas ?
(Apart from Ed Davey, natch)
But I don't think that displays delusion - it illustrates exactly what Kyriakides is trying to do.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/11/25/how-well-do-abc1-and-c2de-correspond-our-own-class
But there is about 0.0% possibility of that happening. And the disturbing possibility is that this is the new face of the EU.
So they though they would get into delivery contracts. So they bought at what seemed low low prices - from the specialist trading outfits. Then learnt all about physical delivery contracts.... the very hard way...
The reaction has been the sort of thing governments rightly get pilloried about by oppositions.
They could have made their criticisms and unhappiness clear without the distractions, leaks and accusations.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/eu-referendum-michael-gove-s-full-statement-why-he-backing-brexit-a6886221.html
Later on in the year I switched my vote as result.
Although it's complex as they have a different set of parties and her predecessor was in the Democratic caucus despite being the same party (the party is defined by its support for statehood rather than traditional US lines). They are probably wise to send a Republican-leaning person to make the statehood case but probably wouldn't if admitted.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2021/01/27/eu-astrazeneca-vaccine-row-descends-farce-crunch-talks/
"Inert gas" may still be an acceptable term in some less advanced parts of Wales, but it's something we find deeply offensive and you really need to move into the 21st century and stop this sort of gratuitous comment.
Which is entirely irrelevant to the accusations on contract.
May be effective too, it will likely ensure that AZN are very careful that best efforts (if that's the wording) are indeed demonstrably made everywhere. I'm sure we've all had unreasonable clients/bosses demanding unreasonable things and we huff and puff, but if they're important enough then we try a bit harder to make them shut up, or at least give them some kind of promise we were planning to deliver anyway so that they think they've achieved something. If AZN announce that they will manage x deliveries by x date - even if already planned/expected - then that's politically useful to those doing the demanding.
I don't like it and I don't think it reflects very well on those making the fuss, but that's beside the point, really.
They were asleep on the job and have only just woken up and realised other countries have done it better.
Keeping Britain in the EU was a key plank of his manifesto for spitzenkandidaten, and he abjectly failed.
https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole/status/1354416196716736513?s=19
On the former, I'd agree with you, but that still means VdL is out of her depth against AZ's in-house team plus whatever advisors they have. On the latter, I tend to disagree.
https://twitter.com/ShaanVP/status/1353951055156015104
https://twitter.com/MRJKilcoyne/status/1354453661913665541?s=20
But if it means more people can get a highly efficacious first dose then that sounds entirely good news. Did you read what the AZN CEO had to say on this subject?
“The UK agreement was reached in June, three months before the European one. As you could imagine, the UK government said the supply coming out of the UK supply chain would go to the UK first. Basically, that's how it is. In the EU agreement it is mentioned that the manufacturing sites in the UK were an option for Europe, but only later. But we're moving very quickly, the supply in the UK is very rapid. The government is vaccinating 2.5 million people a week, about 500,000 a day, our vaccine supply is growing quickly. As soon as we have reached a sufficient number of vaccinations in the UK, we will be able to use that site to help Europe as well. But the contract with the UK was signed first and the UK, of course, said “you supply us first”, and this is fair enough. This vaccine was developed with the UK government, Oxford and with us as well. As soon as we can, we'll help the EU. I mean, as a company we are half Swedish and half British. In fact, we're global, of course, but we are European as much as we are British".
my bold
What % is right for AZN RobD do tell. Do you believe AZN has enhanced their reputation or damaged it I think the latter
For Pfizer its all pretty straight forward for AZN the opposite unless you can point me to an official source that gives effectiveness
*innocent face*
We're guessing here, but I'd be extremely surprised if the agreement didn't cover applying for approval explicitly, and in any event "best endeavours" would certainly exclude a decision to apply for approval everywhere but the EU. I'd also be extremely surprised if AZ decided to forgo all sales in a large market.
There are reasons AZ may win its tussle. But that particular argument is wrong on its face.
They were saying just today it is near 100% effective at preventing serious cases that require hospitilisation. I don't see any reason to think that their reputation has already been trashed.
We just need to ignore it and continue on as we are doing. The vaccine roll-out is going well. We don't need to engage with this nonsense.
https://twitter.com/BrunoBrussels/status/1354456494578819079?s=20
Hardly worth AZ getting too puffy in response with a body like the EU, or any government, but after achieving great things the companies with their vaccines probably feel hard done by despite production failings.