WATCH: Labour leader Keir Starmer accuses Boris Johnson of using the "shoplifters' defence" over the lobbying scandal. #PMQs pic.twitter.com/OcdgiGnOnF
Can we all take a moment to laugh* at this poor trader.
Barclays Plc shares briefly dropped almost 10% in the opening minutes of Wednesday’s session, the most intraday in more than a year, in what traders said was likely due to an error known as a “fat finger.”
The stock entered a volatility auction at about 8:06 a.m. in London after two trades totaling about 48,000 shares at a price of 168.40 pence, according to Bloomberg data. The shares quickly recovered after the five-minute pause and were down 0.3% to 186.32 pence at midday.
Wednesday’s apparent error briefly trimmed about 3.2 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) from the bank’s market capitalization.
About two years ago, a fat finger was cited for an 83% drop in shares of investment firm Jardine Matheson Holdings Ltd. in Singapore, while in 2018, BNP Paribas Securities was blamed for erroneous orders that knocked almost 10% off the value of Taiwan-listed Formosa Petrochemical Corp.
While erroneous trades are sometimes canceled, there were no cancelations for Barclays as of midday, Bloomberg data show. The day’s low, according to the data, matched that shown on the London Stock Exchange website.
I can't believe there aren't processes or "are you sure?" confirmation checks to deal with this sort of thing, especially when such large amounts of money are on the line!
Ursula von der Leyen says the EU is negotiating a new contract with BioNTech/Pfizer for 1.8bn doses for 2022-2023 with the full supply chain in the EU.
40-45 billion Euro expenditure.
Certainly a change of spots.
It's a lot of money to spend to monopolise the supply chain for vaccines that the EU won't need.
I’m wondering what they’re going to do next.
Is there a mindless, totally avoidable bizarre cockup they haven’t tried?
My money’s on injecting people with Covid instead of with the vaccine.
I do hope that last line was deliberate...
Why wouldn’t it be? Although I note I left ‘them’ out, but I don’t think it alters the meaning.
It’s just difficult to think of what they could do that would be worse than what they’ve done. That’s the only example I could come up with.
I can't believe there aren't processes or "are you sure?" confirmation checks to deal with this sort of thing, especially when such large amounts of money are on the line!
There are, but people kind of ignore that or more likely in this case did everything right up and until they last button they pressed.
Traders are nearly as arrogant and full of legendary modesty as lawyers, for them to make a mistake is unpossible for them.
Ursula von der Leyen says the EU is negotiating a new contract with BioNTech/Pfizer for 1.8bn doses for 2022-2023 with the full supply chain in the EU.
40-45 billion Euro expenditure.
Certainly a change of spots.
It's a lot of money to spend to monopolise the supply chain for vaccines that the EU won't need.
I’m wondering what they’re going to do next.
Is there a mindless, totally avoidable bizarre cockup they haven’t tried?
My money’s on injecting people with Covid instead of with the vaccine.
I do hope that last line was deliberate...
Why wouldn’t it be? Although I note I left ‘them’ out, but I don’t think it alters the meaning.
It’s just difficult to think of what they could do that would be worse than what they’ve done. That’s the only example I could come up with.
Because vaccines, traditionally, do contain specimens of the disease they are trying to inoculate against.
I note that the Danes, having abandoned the AZN vaccine out of "an abundance of caution" have already determined that "those who have received the first injection with AstraZeneca will later receive an invitation to vaccination with another vaccine", despite no mixed use trials having yet reported results.
Odd. Particularly as the risk from a second shot of AZN, if you didn't experience the very rare side effect form the first shot, is much lower still.
I can't believe there aren't processes or "are you sure?" confirmation checks to deal with this sort of thing, especially when such large amounts of money are on the line!
You wouldn't believe how much money a trader could lose each year by having to take the time to hit one extra button in the confirmation process every time they execute a trade.
@TheScreamingEagles I don't get it. Is it just a trade that was made by accident?
He put in a price of 168.40 instead of 186.40 (the price was 186.32 at the time)
That sounds like it, and you could probably read that error correctly back to yourself before hitting the final execute. Someone just lost his bonus for this year.
Ursula von der Leyen says the EU is negotiating a new contract with BioNTech/Pfizer for 1.8bn doses for 2022-2023 with the full supply chain in the EU.
40-45 billion Euro expenditure.
Certainly a change of spots.
It's a lot of money to spend to monopolise the supply chain for vaccines that the EU won't need.
I’m wondering what they’re going to do next.
Is there a mindless, totally avoidable bizarre cockup they haven’t tried?
My money’s on injecting people with Covid instead of with the vaccine.
I do hope that last line was deliberate...
Why wouldn’t it be? Although I note I left ‘them’ out, but I don’t think it alters the meaning.
It’s just difficult to think of what they could do that would be worse than what they’ve done. That’s the only example I could come up with.
Because vaccines, traditionally, do contain specimens of the disease they are trying to inoculate against.
I can't believe there aren't processes or "are you sure?" confirmation checks to deal with this sort of thing, especially when such large amounts of money are on the line!
There are, but people kind of ignore that or more likely in this case did everything right up and until they last button they pressed.
Traders are nearly as arrogant and full of legendary modesty as lawyers, for them to make a mistake is unpossible for them.
Unless you have an external system checking the trade nothing will stop a user doing something stupid. They will press every single "Are you sure?" button you could possibly add....
@TheScreamingEagles I don't get it. Is it just a trade that was made by accident?
He put in a price of 168.40 instead of 186.40 (the price was 186.32 at the time)
That sounds like it, and you could probably read that error correctly back to yourself before hitting the final execute. Someone just lost his bonus for this year.
Said employee is about to be probed like never before, if they or anyone close to them were involved in any trades/bets/etc on the share price of Barclays being lower this morning then they are in for a world of pain.
I note that the Danes, having abandoned the AZN vaccine out of "an abundance of caution" have already determined that "those who have received the first injection with AstraZeneca will later receive an invitation to vaccination with another vaccine", despite no mixed use trials having yet reported results.
Odd. Particularly as the risk from a second shot of AZN, if you didn't experience the very rare side effect form the first shot, is much lower still.
Indeed, this seems to be a very odd decision, at least the move to switch second doses. Theoretically it should be fine, but theories are sometimes wrong. It would be much more sensible to wait for the trial data that is due in the next couple of weeks for the AZ/Pfizer heterologous dosage, especially as they're now expanding the trial to include Moderna and Novavax, approval pending for the latter. It's a bit silly not to wait.
Ursula von der Leyen says the EU is negotiating a new contract with BioNTech/Pfizer for 1.8bn doses for 2022-2023 with the full supply chain in the EU.
40-45 billion Euro expenditure.
Certainly a change of spots.
It's a lot of money to spend to monopolise the supply chain for vaccines that the EU won't need.
I’m wondering what they’re going to do next.
Is there a mindless, totally avoidable bizarre cockup they haven’t tried?
My money’s on injecting people with Covid instead of with the vaccine.
I do hope that last line was deliberate...
Why wouldn’t it be? Although I note I left ‘them’ out, but I don’t think it alters the meaning.
It’s just difficult to think of what they could do that would be worse than what they’ve done. That’s the only example I could come up with.
Because vaccines, traditionally, do contain specimens of the disease they are trying to inoculate against.
I am fully aware of that.
But not, AIUI, in this case.
True for AstraZenenca, and less true for Pfizer/Moderns.
Interesting article from Cyclefree as ever, particularly the latter point about the criticism of public sector workers and Labour's unwillingness to criticise their complicity.
The question of lobbying however, is a very complex one and it is not entirely malign, much as simplistic journos and lefties would like us to all believe. Lobbying is, in fact, if it is regulated properly, a perfectly proper part of politics and its relationship with business. The reality is most civil servants have not the first clue how the private sector works. If there were no lobbying (if it were essentially outlawed) there would certainly be very bad laws enacted that seemed very laudable to the man/woman in the street but none the less might result in very bad unintended consequences for industry, possibly resulting in loss of international competitiveness and loss of jobs. People who are trained in what may be referred to as "government affairs" in many corporates are invaluable to the companies and by extension to UK plc. generally. These matters are often more complex than they first appear.
As someone who regularly deals with Public Sector procurement I can confirm that the brown envelope situation remains the same as it has been for years,
I note that the Danes, having abandoned the AZN vaccine out of "an abundance of caution" have already determined that "those who have received the first injection with AstraZeneca will later receive an invitation to vaccination with another vaccine", despite no mixed use trials having yet reported results.
Odd. Particularly as the risk from a second shot of AZN, if you didn't experience the very rare side effect form the first shot, is much lower still.
Can they give it to us? I mean that would do very nicely thank you.
Ursula von der Leyen says the EU is negotiating a new contract with BioNTech/Pfizer for 1.8bn doses for 2022-2023 with the full supply chain in the EU.
40-45 billion Euro expenditure.
Certainly a change of spots.
It's a lot of money to spend to monopolise the supply chain for vaccines that the EU won't need.
I’m wondering what they’re going to do next.
Is there a mindless, totally avoidable bizarre cockup they haven’t tried?
My money’s on injecting people with Covid instead of with the vaccine.
I do hope that last line was deliberate...
Why wouldn’t it be? Although I note I left ‘them’ out, but I don’t think it alters the meaning.
It’s just difficult to think of what they could do that would be worse than what they’ve done. That’s the only example I could come up with.
Because vaccines, traditionally, do contain specimens of the disease they are trying to inoculate against.
I am fully aware of that.
But not, AIUI, in this case.
True for AstraZenenca, and less true for Pfizer/Moderns.
But still, the link was close enough to amuse me.
I was thinking of what they might do that would seem very sensible to somebody of limited intelligence and boundless arrogance, and would actually be rather stupid.
And I came up with, from a tweet by an antivaxxer months ago, the idea of injecting large quantities of neat virus into people to build immunity that way.
Now, of course, it would have the desired effect after a fashion, but at far higher risk of something going disastrously wrong than using a vaccine where usually the virus is either dead, or weakened.
Of course, ironically, by cocking up their vaccine rollout that is de facto if not de jure the strategy they have adopted...
Anyway, glad you were amused, which was the secondary point of it.
I note that the Danes, having abandoned the AZN vaccine out of "an abundance of caution" have already determined that "those who have received the first injection with AstraZeneca will later receive an invitation to vaccination with another vaccine", despite no mixed use trials having yet reported results.
Odd. Particularly as the risk from a second shot of AZN, if you didn't experience the very rare side effect form the first shot, is much lower still.
Indeed, this seems to be a very odd decision, at least the move to switch second doses. Theoretically it should be fine, but theories are sometimes wrong. It would be much more sensible to wait for the trial data that is due in the next couple of weeks for the AZ/Pfizer heterologous dosage, especially as they're now expanding the trial to include Moderna and Novavax, approval pending for the latter. It's a bit silly not to wait.
I haven't analysed the Danish political leadership, but I suspect that if they are much like our own political class they might have a distinct lack of scientific training to draw on.
@TheScreamingEagles I don't get it. Is it just a trade that was made by accident?
He put in a price of 168.40 instead of 186.40 (the price was 186.32 at the time)
The cost of the "error" is £8640 and is clearly a transposition error. Is it actually worth investigating ?
Wednesday’s apparent error briefly trimmed about 3.2 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) from the bank’s market capitalization.
That's a fiction by multiplying the total available shares by the price.
The real cost of the error is the traded shares (48,000) multiplied by the error (18p) = £8,640 isn't it?
An 8k error is still uncomfortable for whoever has to "please explain" but its not like billions were really 'wiped out'.
Doesn't quite work like that. You need to look at the volume of shares traded on the way down and then on the way back. The guy lost out on his 48,000 shares but in between the error and the recovery there will have been millions of shares traded.
It would be a disorderly market. And the FCA and regulators in general really, really hate disorderly markets.
The firm would have to show it had controls in place to prevent it. I haven't seen the details but if it was one guy pressing the wrong button that sounds strange. If he was buying way below the market so what he sits in the order book. If he was selling he should have been filled at the bid down to his size.
The irony is that a lot of SNP voters seem to have listened to Salmond's message and thought "you're right voting for the SNP on the list would be a wasted vote. So I'll vote for the Scottish Greens instead".
Oh Lordy, recent events have shown to me Scotland's legal and police institutions aren't fit for purpose, and need to be taken over by England.,
The senior detective who led an ill-fated fraud investigation into the takeover of Rangers FC has denied chanting songs associated with the club in front of a witness.
Detective Chief Inspector Jim Robertson, 53, said that he may have “referenced” a song called The Billy Boys but did not sing the controversial anthem while in the company of Philip Duffy, an employee with Duff and Phelps, the financial services firm that managed the Rangers administration.
Robertson said he may have mentioned the meaning of a codename for the Rangers administration case used by David Grier, a business consultant. The codename was Project William, which Robertson said was a reference to William of Orange. He said he had learnt about the name when taking a statement from Paul Clark, a former Rangers administrator who was arrested during the investigation and later cleared of criminal wrongdoing.
He added: “I took a statement from Paul Clark in 2012 and I was aware of different project names being given to the files that were being given — so the Murray Group had Project Blue which related to Rangers Football Club then it changed to Project Charlotte; the scenario being Sir David Murray’s offices being in Charlotte Square in Edinburgh.” Murray is a former chairman of Rangers.
Robertson added: “Then when the club was going into administration and they were going to administrators, they decided to change it from Project Charlotte and David Grier came up with a name and his name was Project William. When Paul Clark mentioned it to me, he laughed when he was giving his statement. During his time as an administrator coming from the south of England he had learned the connotations of the name William in relation to William of Orange, King Billy etc and the song The Billy Boys — that was discussed and it was David Grier who named that.
“Now he would have had knowledge in my opinion because David Grier told us he was a Rangers fan and that he grew up in Barrhead outside Glasgow. He would have known that and to us was his private joke.
“During this inquiry, I was asking certain individuals of the connotations of the Project William name.
“I may have mentioned that to Phil Duffy about the William name and the connotations of the name and I may have referenced the Rangers song The Billy Boys in relation to that.
“But I did not stand up and chant The Billy Boys.”
The irony is that a lot of SNP voters seem to have listened to Salmond's message and thought "you're right voting for the SNP on the list would be a wasted vote. So I'll vote for the Scottish Greens instead".
Looks like it and also like Salmond's days of influence are only in his imagination
There is a third trap for Starmer, and perhaps the biggest one of all. That is that Labour is as corrupt as the Conservatives are. So, while it may be tempting to do his duty as LOTO and make hay on this particular scandal, rather too many people remember New Labour's record in office. And there's no reason to think that Whatever-Labour-Starmer-Leads would be any better in government. Although, because government under Starmer would probably be bigger, there would be correspondingly more opportunities for public sector corruption.
Starmer should definitely go after this scandal - as LOTO it's his duty, and, let's face it, he hasn't made much of an impact elsewhere. But I don't think it will necessarily be in his long- or even medium-term interests to do so.
@TheScreamingEagles I don't get it. Is it just a trade that was made by accident?
He put in a price of 168.40 instead of 186.40 (the price was 186.32 at the time)
The cost of the "error" is £8640 and is clearly a transposition error. Is it actually worth investigating ?
Wednesday’s apparent error briefly trimmed about 3.2 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) from the bank’s market capitalization.
That's a fiction by multiplying the total available shares by the price.
The real cost of the error is the traded shares (48,000) multiplied by the error (18p) = £8,640 isn't it?
An 8k error is still uncomfortable for whoever has to "please explain" but its not like billions were really 'wiped out'.
Doesn't quite work like that. You need to look at the volume of shares traded on the way down and then on the way back. The guy lost out on his 48,000 shares but in between the error and the recovery there will have been millions of shares traded.
It would be a disorderly market. And the FCA and regulators in general really, really hate disorderly markets.
The firm would have to show it had controls in place to prevent it. I haven't seen the details but if it was one guy pressing the wrong button that sounds strange. If he was buying way below the market so what he sits in the order book. If he was selling he should have been filled at the bid down to his size.
Confirmed as algorithm trades. Oddly the £1.70 odd trades it don't show up in the trade report download
2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 287 535.0828 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1830 3411.852 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1328 2475.9232 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 272 507.008 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1776 3310.464 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1550 2889.2 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 2078 3873.8076 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 1026 1912.6692 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.4 2859 5329.176 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.38 2293 4273.6934 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 2475 4612.41 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 904 1684.6944 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:37.263 GBX 186.339 3 5.59017 Off-Book XLON P 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 3220 5998.86 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 1032 1922.616 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 506 942.678 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 2000 3726 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 3000 5587.8 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 2000 3725.2 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1017 1894.671 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1972 3673.836 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1086 2023.218 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.043 GBX 186.26 1916 3568.7416 AT XLON P ALGO
Ursula von der Leyen says the EU is negotiating a new contract with BioNTech/Pfizer for 1.8bn doses for 2022-2023 with the full supply chain in the EU.
40-45 billion Euro expenditure.
Certainly a change of spots.
It's a lot of money to spend to monopolise the supply chain for vaccines that the EU won't need.
I’m wondering what they’re going to do next.
Is there a mindless, totally avoidable bizarre cockup they haven’t tried?
My money’s on injecting people with Covid instead of with the vaccine.
I do hope that last line was deliberate...
Why wouldn’t it be? Although I note I left ‘them’ out, but I don’t think it alters the meaning.
It’s just difficult to think of what they could do that would be worse than what they’ve done. That’s the only example I could come up with.
Because vaccines, traditionally, do contain specimens of the disease they are trying to inoculate against.
Traditionally. But none of the vaccines in use currently in the US, UK or EU do.
@TheScreamingEagles I don't get it. Is it just a trade that was made by accident?
He put in a price of 168.40 instead of 186.40 (the price was 186.32 at the time)
The cost of the "error" is £8640 and is clearly a transposition error. Is it actually worth investigating ?
Wednesday’s apparent error briefly trimmed about 3.2 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) from the bank’s market capitalization.
That's a fiction by multiplying the total available shares by the price.
The real cost of the error is the traded shares (48,000) multiplied by the error (18p) = £8,640 isn't it?
An 8k error is still uncomfortable for whoever has to "please explain" but its not like billions were really 'wiped out'.
Doesn't quite work like that. You need to look at the volume of shares traded on the way down and then on the way back. The guy lost out on his 48,000 shares but in between the error and the recovery there will have been millions of shares traded.
It would be a disorderly market. And the FCA and regulators in general really, really hate disorderly markets.
The firm would have to show it had controls in place to prevent it. I haven't seen the details but if it was one guy pressing the wrong button that sounds strange. If he was buying way below the market so what he sits in the order book. If he was selling he should have been filled at the bid down to his size.
Confirmed as algorithm trades. Oddly the £1.70 odd trades it don't show up in the trade report download
2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 287 535.0828 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1830 3411.852 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1328 2475.9232 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 272 507.008 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1776 3310.464 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1550 2889.2 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 2078 3873.8076 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 1026 1912.6692 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.4 2859 5329.176 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.38 2293 4273.6934 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 2475 4612.41 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 904 1684.6944 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:37.263 GBX 186.339 3 5.59017 Off-Book XLON P 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 3220 5998.86 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 1032 1922.616 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 506 942.678 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 2000 3726 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 3000 5587.8 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 2000 3725.2 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1017 1894.671 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1972 3673.836 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1086 2023.218 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.043 GBX 186.26 1916 3568.7416 AT XLON P ALGO
Thanks that makes more sense all automated trades over 40 seconds or so.
And as you say price doesn't seem bonkers - must be A TON more!!
Another interesting and thought-provoking post from Ms Cyclefree. I was particularly taken with one sentence 'Starmer’s audience is not a courtroom or a judge. He does not always appear to understand this." However in the clip which accompanied the piece Starmer quoted the "Shoplifters Defence" a phrase which would, for a variety of reasons, be understood by most of a wider audience. It's a good sign.
@TheScreamingEagles I don't get it. Is it just a trade that was made by accident?
He put in a price of 168.40 instead of 186.40 (the price was 186.32 at the time)
The cost of the "error" is £8640 and is clearly a transposition error. Is it actually worth investigating ?
Wednesday’s apparent error briefly trimmed about 3.2 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) from the bank’s market capitalization.
That's a fiction by multiplying the total available shares by the price.
The real cost of the error is the traded shares (48,000) multiplied by the error (18p) = £8,640 isn't it?
An 8k error is still uncomfortable for whoever has to "please explain" but its not like billions were really 'wiped out'.
Doesn't quite work like that. You need to look at the volume of shares traded on the way down and then on the way back. The guy lost out on his 48,000 shares but in between the error and the recovery there will have been millions of shares traded.
It would be a disorderly market. And the FCA and regulators in general really, really hate disorderly markets.
The firm would have to show it had controls in place to prevent it. I haven't seen the details but if it was one guy pressing the wrong button that sounds strange. If he was buying way below the market so what he sits in the order book. If he was selling he should have been filled at the bid down to his size.
From what I've read and heard, it is a transposition error that hasn't been reversed/cancelled.
I think given the way the share price of Barclays has gone in the last year, a fall today may have triggered some other moves elsewhere, FOMO might be behind it.
@DavidL are you expecting the SNP to get a majority?
Its going to be close. I think (hope) that they will fall just short but their little green helpers will get them over the line once again. I expect the Tories to fall back a bit, possibly to 3rd and Labour to pick up a bit but not necessarily win many more seats.
Most of the campaigning seems to revolve around the regional list vote, where the MSM and broadcasters are continuing to blank the Alba party. Salmond needs something to give them a second push. I expect an assault on all the lead SNP candidate in the regional lists, all of whom IIRC received a tiny proportion of members' votes, but have been advanced to the top as preferred BAME/disabled status (self ID'd or not).
That would be interesting. Salmond must be getting just a little bit desperate. He is an ego maniac and he is seriously in danger of being completely humiliated. He may well lash out at some point.
But the campaign has been almost non existent. Which has suited Nicola just fine of course.
Like a lot of pols I believe Salmond, wily campaigner though he is, has been listening to ill chosen advisors & believed twitter was real life. He's maybe been out of the ring too long.
'You're a big man, but you're in bad shape. With me it's a full time job. Now behave yourself.'
I haven't been following it but I did catch a few of his interviews at the start and it seemed to me he had a potential comms problem with the "sex pest" thing. Every interviewer was asking him if he had reflected on his behaviour and felt there were lessons there (for him) as regards future interactions with women. Clearly angling for something like "Of course I did nothing criminal, a court has confirmed that, but yes I've reflected long and hard, and yes I can see that perhaps I did occasionally behave in a way that made people uncomfortable, and I'm sorry if that was the case, and I have absolutely taken this on board."
But he wouldn't go anywhere near it. All he kept doing was stone walling with "Court found me innocent. Court found me innocent. Court found me innocent". Refusing to acknowledge any territory existed between totally ok behaviour and criminal behaviour (when everyone knows that not only does such territory exist but that it's quite spacious).
I do get that it's a sensitive area and that his approach might be the only one he thought he could manage or risk, but it didn't come over well. Not to me it didn't anyway. And I thought to myself, mmm, this is a non answer to a big and juicy question, therefore it's probably going to keep coming back - a la Farron and gay sex - and maybe Alex would be better off biting the bullet and getting an answer sorted out.
So, I don't know if he has? Or has it gone away?
That's a fair characterisation of Salmond's reaction.
No, it hasn't gone away, but Alba & Salmond's exclusion from the debates (which is their latest cry of IT'S NO BLOODY FAIR!) has prevented it being addressed, and I'm fairly sure he'd have carried on with the found innocent of every charge line in any case. Salmond's personal ratings in polling implies that the damage is pretty fixed in folks' minds.
As you suggest even a modest admission of naughty behaviour would probably have worked for him. No one is expecting him to spend the rest of his earthly existence working in a leper colony but 'admitting fallibility isn't a sign of weakness' is a lesson Salmond is never going to learn.
Getting the Telegraph, Spectator, Brillo and David fucking Davis out to bat for you was also a major error. If an aversion to populist politics reeking of rancid testosterone, Tories and Brexit are a driving force in Scottish politics, distancing yourself from that fester fest would have been a smart move.
@TheScreamingEagles I don't get it. Is it just a trade that was made by accident?
He put in a price of 168.40 instead of 186.40 (the price was 186.32 at the time)
The cost of the "error" is £8640 and is clearly a transposition error. Is it actually worth investigating ?
Wednesday’s apparent error briefly trimmed about 3.2 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) from the bank’s market capitalization.
That's a fiction by multiplying the total available shares by the price.
The real cost of the error is the traded shares (48,000) multiplied by the error (18p) = £8,640 isn't it?
An 8k error is still uncomfortable for whoever has to "please explain" but its not like billions were really 'wiped out'.
Doesn't quite work like that. You need to look at the volume of shares traded on the way down and then on the way back. The guy lost out on his 48,000 shares but in between the error and the recovery there will have been millions of shares traded.
It would be a disorderly market. And the FCA and regulators in general really, really hate disorderly markets.
The firm would have to show it had controls in place to prevent it. I haven't seen the details but if it was one guy pressing the wrong button that sounds strange. If he was buying way below the market so what he sits in the order book. If he was selling he should have been filled at the bid down to his size.
Confirmed as algorithm trades. Oddly the £1.70 odd trades it don't show up in the trade report download
2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 287 535.0828 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1830 3411.852 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1328 2475.9232 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 272 507.008 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1776 3310.464 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1550 2889.2 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 2078 3873.8076 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 1026 1912.6692 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.4 2859 5329.176 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.38 2293 4273.6934 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 2475 4612.41 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 904 1684.6944 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:37.263 GBX 186.339 3 5.59017 Off-Book XLON P 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 3220 5998.86 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 1032 1922.616 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 506 942.678 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 2000 3726 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 3000 5587.8 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 2000 3725.2 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1017 1894.671 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1972 3673.836 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1086 2023.218 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.043 GBX 186.26 1916 3568.7416 AT XLON P ALGO
Thanks that makes more sense all automated trades over 40 seconds or so.
And as you say price doesn't seem bonkers - must be A TON more!!
Lol found them - here
2021-04-14T07:06:19.403 GBX 168.4 42100 70896.4 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T07:06:19.403 GBX 168.4 5900 9935.6 AT XLON P ALGO
We are basically in agreement with EMA's assessment regarding the AstraZeneca vaccine. That is why it is important to emphasise that it is still an approved vaccine. And I understand if other countries in a different situation than us choose to continue using the vaccine. If Denmark were in a completely different situation and in the midst of a violent third outbreak, for example, and a healthcare system under pressure – and if we had not reached such an advanced point in our rollout of the vaccines – then I would not hesitate to use the vaccine, even if there were rare but severe complications associated with using it," says Søren Brostrøm.
@TheScreamingEagles I don't get it. Is it just a trade that was made by accident?
He put in a price of 168.40 instead of 186.40 (the price was 186.32 at the time)
The cost of the "error" is £8640 and is clearly a transposition error. Is it actually worth investigating ?
Wednesday’s apparent error briefly trimmed about 3.2 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) from the bank’s market capitalization.
That's a fiction by multiplying the total available shares by the price.
The real cost of the error is the traded shares (48,000) multiplied by the error (18p) = £8,640 isn't it?
An 8k error is still uncomfortable for whoever has to "please explain" but its not like billions were really 'wiped out'.
Doesn't quite work like that. You need to look at the volume of shares traded on the way down and then on the way back. The guy lost out on his 48,000 shares but in between the error and the recovery there will have been millions of shares traded.
It would be a disorderly market. And the FCA and regulators in general really, really hate disorderly markets.
The firm would have to show it had controls in place to prevent it. I haven't seen the details but if it was one guy pressing the wrong button that sounds strange. If he was buying way below the market so what he sits in the order book. If he was selling he should have been filled at the bid down to his size.
Confirmed as algorithm trades. Oddly the £1.70 odd trades it don't show up in the trade report download
2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 287 535.0828 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1830 3411.852 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1328 2475.9232 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 272 507.008 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1776 3310.464 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1550 2889.2 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 2078 3873.8076 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 1026 1912.6692 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.4 2859 5329.176 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.38 2293 4273.6934 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 2475 4612.41 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 904 1684.6944 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:37.263 GBX 186.339 3 5.59017 Off-Book XLON P 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 3220 5998.86 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 1032 1922.616 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 506 942.678 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 2000 3726 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 3000 5587.8 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 2000 3725.2 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1017 1894.671 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1972 3673.836 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1086 2023.218 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.043 GBX 186.26 1916 3568.7416 AT XLON P ALGO
Thanks that makes more sense all automated trades over 40 seconds or so.
And as you say price doesn't seem bonkers - must be A TON more!!
Lol found them - here
2021-04-14T07:06:19.403 GBX 168.4 42100 70896.4 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T07:06:19.403 GBX 168.4 5900 9935.6 AT XLON P ALGO
@TheScreamingEagles I don't get it. Is it just a trade that was made by accident?
He put in a price of 168.40 instead of 186.40 (the price was 186.32 at the time)
The cost of the "error" is £8640 and is clearly a transposition error. Is it actually worth investigating ?
Wednesday’s apparent error briefly trimmed about 3.2 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) from the bank’s market capitalization.
That's a fiction by multiplying the total available shares by the price.
The real cost of the error is the traded shares (48,000) multiplied by the error (18p) = £8,640 isn't it?
An 8k error is still uncomfortable for whoever has to "please explain" but its not like billions were really 'wiped out'.
Doesn't quite work like that. You need to look at the volume of shares traded on the way down and then on the way back. The guy lost out on his 48,000 shares but in between the error and the recovery there will have been millions of shares traded.
It would be a disorderly market. And the FCA and regulators in general really, really hate disorderly markets.
The firm would have to show it had controls in place to prevent it. I haven't seen the details but if it was one guy pressing the wrong button that sounds strange. If he was buying way below the market so what he sits in the order book. If he was selling he should have been filled at the bid down to his size.
Confirmed as algorithm trades. Oddly the £1.70 odd trades it don't show up in the trade report download
2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 287 535.0828 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1830 3411.852 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1328 2475.9232 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 272 507.008 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1776 3310.464 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1550 2889.2 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 2078 3873.8076 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 1026 1912.6692 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.4 2859 5329.176 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.38 2293 4273.6934 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 2475 4612.41 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 904 1684.6944 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:37.263 GBX 186.339 3 5.59017 Off-Book XLON P 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 3220 5998.86 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 1032 1922.616 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 506 942.678 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 2000 3726 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 3000 5587.8 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 2000 3725.2 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1017 1894.671 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1972 3673.836 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1086 2023.218 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T08:06:52.043 GBX 186.26 1916 3568.7416 AT XLON P ALGO
Thanks that makes more sense all automated trades over 40 seconds or so.
And as you say price doesn't seem bonkers - must be A TON more!!
Lol found them - here
2021-04-14T07:06:19.403 GBX 168.4 42100 70896.4 AT XLON P ALGO 2021-04-14T07:06:19.403 GBX 168.4 5900 9935.6 AT XLON P ALGO
Why would people (Or properly programmed computers for that matter) be trading in the third of a second before the £1.68 matched price at between £1.70 and £1.77 ?
FPT, and apologies for not lifting and shifting all the embedding:
@Philip_Thompson said I don't think that's right. The national case rate now is back to what it was in August last year.
Please can you say when and where it became illegal to enter other people's homes with a local case rate around half what they are today.
I replied: So, to take my own example, on July 30th last year it became illegal in Kirklees to meet in private homes or gardens. The rolling case rate in the borough at that time - and testing has significantly ramped up at that point - was around 24 per 100000 residents. Nationally, we are now at 28 per 100000 residents now (locally in Kirklees 72 per 100k) and it is now permitted to meet in gardens.
You can probably kick around various factors at the edges of those stats if you like, but lockdown regulations were being actively introduced at current case levels.
The financial markets really are a different world to us mere mortals.
At times I struggle to understand it, and I've been working in the banking/financial services sector for a decade this coming September.
Which probably something the Head of Regulatory Affairs SHOULD NOT admit to.
It is not too crazy if you look at everything in entirety.
First, money is cheap, is likely to remain cheap and a number of asset classes (cash, bonds and now property) are out of bounds because returns will be non-existent. So money has to go somewhere.
Second, the stock market reflects the value of companies, not necessarily the wider economy. In the past, it might have been the domestic economy was crap but a firm sold a lot overseas so it wasn't exposed, or that its product wasn't necessarily cyclical. But increasingly the story is about more share of wealth going to companies over (certainly) workers and, to a degree, Governments (because, in many cases, they are paying lower taxes). That doesn't look to be changing.
Third, the share price reflects predicted future profits. So you can get tech companies at crazy valuations but, if you think we are on the cusp of a revolution and these companies will benefit, they don't look so crazy on future earnings (look at the PEG ratio). Which is why all these efficiency software tools have rocketed - the market believes the way in which we work is being transformed and we are the start of that process, with a lot more to go. The winners will make out like bandits
PS on the third point, it's why I am negative on the future for many people economically - a lot of tasks will be replaced.
The financial markets really are a different world to us mere mortals.
At times I struggle to understand it, and I've been working in the banking/financial services sector for a decade this coming September.
Which probably something the Head of Regulatory Affairs SHOULD NOT admit to.
It is not too crazy if you look at everything in entirety.
First, money is cheap, is likely to remain cheap and a number of asset classes (cash, bonds and now property) are out of bounds because returns will be non-existent. So money has to go somewhere.
Second, the stock market reflects the value of companies, not necessarily the wider economy. In the past, it might have been the domestic economy was crap but a firm sold a lot overseas so it wasn't exposed, or that its product wasn't necessarily cyclical. But increasingly the story is about more share of wealth going to companies over (certainly) workers and, to a degree, Governments (because, in many cases, they are paying lower taxes). That doesn't look to be changing.
Third, the share price reflects predicted future profits. So you can get tech companies at crazy valuations but, if you think we are on the cusp of a revolution and these companies will benefit, they don't look so crazy on future earnings (look at the PEG ratio). Which is why all these efficiency software tools have rocketed - the market believes the way in which we work is being transformed and we are the start of that process, with a lot more to go. The winners will make out like bandits
PS on the third point, it's why I am negative on the future for many people economically - a lot of tasks will be replaced.
Explain NFTs!
I mean where's the fucking value in buying a £20 phone (current price in CEX) for £3 million because some third rate celebrity once sent out a tweet on that phone?
Why would people (Or properly programmed computers for that matter) be trading in the third of a second before the £1.68 matched price at between £1.70 and £1.77 ?
I assume that the trader put in a sale at the 168 price, and it thus ran 'through the book' - so sold to those with orders at 182, 177, 176, 170 etc until it hit the 168 price at which point it was then filled by an algo at the limit to the Quantity he'd put in.
Interesting article from Cyclefree as ever, particularly the latter point about the criticism of public sector workers and Labour's unwillingness to criticise their complicity.
The question of lobbying however, is a very complex one and it is not entirely malign, much as simplistic journos and lefties would like us to all believe. Lobbying is, in fact, if it is regulated properly, a perfectly proper part of politics and its relationship with business. The reality is most civil servants have not the first clue how the private sector works. If there were no lobbying (if it were essentially outlawed) there would certainly be very bad laws enacted that seemed very laudable to the man/woman in the street but none the less might result in very bad unintended consequences for industry, possibly resulting in loss of international competitiveness and loss of jobs. People who are trained in what may be referred to as "government affairs" in many corporates are invaluable to the companies and by extension to UK plc. generally. These matters are often more complex than they first appear.
I agree with all of this. However. Just occasionally I contact my MP, asking him to do/support/vote for/ achieve something. This is of course small scale lobbying, and far from being wrong it is what MPs exist to represent. In this real small world in which I live I will get an automated email non reply saying how busy they are; and sometimes I might in due course get a reply which will be a standard draft by an aide or from a relevant ministry's civil servant telling me nothing. Indeed I know people in ministries and MP aides who do the drafting and sending. Whole careers are made from it.
Where people might get fed up is if there is a sense that opinion forming and resulting action is markedly different if you are a billionaire, or if you know the minister's mobile number.
"Now we all know that expenses has dominated politics for the last year. But if anyone thinks that cleaning up politics means dealing with this alone and then forgetting about it, they are wrong. Because there is another big issue that we can no longer ignore.
"It is the next big scandal waiting to happen. It’s an issue that crosses party lines and has tainted our politics for too long, an issue that exposes the far-too-cosy relationship between politics, government, business and money.
"I’m talking about lobbying – and we all know how it works. The lunches, the hospitality, the quiet word in your ear, the ex-ministers and ex-advisors for hire, helping big business find the right way to get its way. In this party, we believe in competition, not cronyism. We believe in market economics, not crony capitalism. So we must be the party that sorts all this out.
"Now, I want to be clear: it’s not just big business that gets involved in lobbying. Charities and other organisations, including trade unions, do it too. What’s more, when it's open and transparent, when people know who is meeting who, for what reason and with what outcome, lobbying is perfectly reasonable.
"It’s important that businesses, charities and other organisations feel they can make sure their voice is heard. And indeed, lobbying often makes for better, more workable, legislation. But I believe that it is increasingly clear that lobbying in this country is getting out of control.
"Today it is a £2 billion industry that has a huge presence in Parliament. The Hansard Society has estimated that some MPs are approached over one hundred times a week by lobbyists. Much of the time this happens covertly.
"We don’t know who is meeting whom. We don’t know whether any favours are being exchanged. We don’t know which outside interests are wielding unhealthy influence. This isn’t a minor issue with minor consequences. Commercial interests - not to mention government contracts - worth hundreds of billions of pounds are potentially at stake.
"I believe that secret corporate lobbying, like the expenses scandal, goes to the heart of why people are so fed up with politics. It arouses people’s worst fears and suspicions about how our political system works, with money buying power, power fishing for money and a cosy club at the top making decisions in their own interest.
"We can’t go on like this. I believe it’s time we shone the light of transparency on lobbying in our country and forced our politics to come clean about who is buying power and influence."
"Politics should belong to people, not big business or big unions, and we need to sort this out. So if we win the election, we will take a lead on this issue by making sure that ex-ministers are not allowed to use their contacts and knowledge - gained while being paid by the public to serve the public - for their own private gain.
"Today, the guidelines state that former ministers shouldn't lobby government for at least twelve months after leaving office. We will start by doubling that to two years.
"But there's another problem. Those guidelines are simply that: guidance issued to ex-ministers by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments, explaining what kind of jobs they can take up. Today, ex-Ministers can ignore this advice without sanction.
"So we will rewrite the Ministerial Code to make clear that anyone who ignores the advice of the Committee will be forced to give up some or all of their Ministerial pension. Dealing with the lobbying issue may be painful, but it needs to happen and because we are from a new generation at ease with openness and accountability, because we believe in social responsibility not state control, we will clean things up.
"So that is the choice the country faces. Five more years of Gordon Brown blocking reform, whether it's money from big business or money from big unions. Or reform to clean up lobbying from a new Conservative government committed to transparency and accountability."
The financial markets really are a different world to us mere mortals.
At times I struggle to understand it, and I've been working in the banking/financial services sector for a decade this coming September.
Which probably something the Head of Regulatory Affairs SHOULD NOT admit to.
It is not too crazy if you look at everything in entirety.
First, money is cheap, is likely to remain cheap and a number of asset classes (cash, bonds and now property) are out of bounds because returns will be non-existent. So money has to go somewhere.
Second, the stock market reflects the value of companies, not necessarily the wider economy. In the past, it might have been the domestic economy was crap but a firm sold a lot overseas so it wasn't exposed, or that its product wasn't necessarily cyclical. But increasingly the story is about more share of wealth going to companies over (certainly) workers and, to a degree, Governments (because, in many cases, they are paying lower taxes). That doesn't look to be changing.
Third, the share price reflects predicted future profits. So you can get tech companies at crazy valuations but, if you think we are on the cusp of a revolution and these companies will benefit, they don't look so crazy on future earnings (look at the PEG ratio). Which is why all these efficiency software tools have rocketed - the market believes the way in which we work is being transformed and we are the start of that process, with a lot more to go. The winners will make out like bandits
PS on the third point, it's why I am negative on the future for many people economically - a lot of tasks will be replaced.
Explain NFTs!
I mean where's the fucking value in buying a £20 phone (current price in CEX) for £3 million because some third rate celebrity once sent out a tweet on that phone?
Targeted at the (Greatest of) Greatest Fools...
But MrEd explains it - people are looking for any place they can put money because there isn't anywhere sane that offers the return they expect for the risk they perceive they are being tasked to take.
"Politics should belong to people, not big business or big unions, and we need to sort this out. So if we win the election, we will take a lead on this issue by making sure that ex-ministers are not allowed to use their contacts and knowledge - gained while being paid by the public to serve the public - for their own private gain.
"Today, the guidelines state that former ministers shouldn't lobby government for at least twelve months after leaving office. We will start by doubling that to two years.
"But there's another problem. Those guidelines are simply that: guidance issued to ex-ministers by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments, explaining what kind of jobs they can take up. Today, ex-Ministers can ignore this advice without sanction.
"So we will rewrite the Ministerial Code to make clear that anyone who ignores the advice of the Committee will be forced to give up some or all of their Ministerial pension. Dealing with the lobbying issue may be painful, but it needs to happen and because we are from a new generation at ease with openness and accountability, because we believe in social responsibility not state control, we will clean things up.
"So that is the choice the country faces. Five more years of Gordon Brown blocking reform, whether it's money from big business or money from big unions. Or reform to clean up lobbying from a new Conservative government committed to transparency and accountability."
As someone who regularly deals with Public Sector procurement I can confirm that the brown envelope situation remains the same as it has been for years,
Surely only in Labour Southampton, LD Eastleigh and NOC Portsmouth but not Tory Havant.
The financial markets really are a different world to us mere mortals.
At times I struggle to understand it, and I've been working in the banking/financial services sector for a decade this coming September.
Which probably something the Head of Regulatory Affairs SHOULD NOT admit to.
It is not too crazy if you look at everything in entirety.
First, money is cheap, is likely to remain cheap and a number of asset classes (cash, bonds and now property) are out of bounds because returns will be non-existent. So money has to go somewhere.
Second, the stock market reflects the value of companies, not necessarily the wider economy. In the past, it might have been the domestic economy was crap but a firm sold a lot overseas so it wasn't exposed, or that its product wasn't necessarily cyclical. But increasingly the story is about more share of wealth going to companies over (certainly) workers and, to a degree, Governments (because, in many cases, they are paying lower taxes). That doesn't look to be changing.
Third, the share price reflects predicted future profits. So you can get tech companies at crazy valuations but, if you think we are on the cusp of a revolution and these companies will benefit, they don't look so crazy on future earnings (look at the PEG ratio). Which is why all these efficiency software tools have rocketed - the market believes the way in which we work is being transformed and we are the start of that process, with a lot more to go. The winners will make out like bandits
PS on the third point, it's why I am negative on the future for many people economically - a lot of tasks will be replaced.
And still on that 3rd point, a tech revolution rendering many jobs obsolete, and given your fear it will lead to mass impoverishment, why are you not supportive of the best way to mitigate this? An interventionist state.
I can't believe there aren't processes or "are you sure?" confirmation checks to deal with this sort of thing, especially when such large amounts of money are on the line!
There are, but people kind of ignore that or more likely in this case did everything right up and until they last button they pressed.
Traders are nearly as arrogant and full of legendary modesty as lawyers, for them to make a mistake is unpossible for them.
Unless you have an external system checking the trade nothing will stop a user doing something stupid. They will press every single "Are you sure?" button you could possibly add....
As the media are busy hanging Cameron out to dry, it looks to me to be the system rather than the man that is dodgy. The stench of sleaze gets even more unpleasant when Johnson rallies his troops to avoid scrutiny of this questionable system of access and patronage.
I suspect Johnson will be quite content for Cameron to carry the can. Like he did with the Japanese schoolboy all those years ago he will play the man and not the ball.
I can't believe there aren't processes or "are you sure?" confirmation checks to deal with this sort of thing, especially when such large amounts of money are on the line!
There are, but people kind of ignore that or more likely in this case did everything right up and until they last button they pressed.
Traders are nearly as arrogant and full of legendary modesty as lawyers, for them to make a mistake is unpossible for them.
Unless you have an external system checking the trade nothing will stop a user doing something stupid. They will press every single "Are you sure?" button you could possibly add....
"Pub apologises after elderly customer refused service because he didn't have a smartphone to register his details
The Angel Of Corbridge in Northumberland has apologised and offered free drinks to 78-year-old David Walters, who complained to a newspaper after he was refused service. The widower did not have a smartphone and therefore was unable to register his details with NHS Test and Trace."
Afternoon. The Danish news is a rather shocking: not using the AZ vaccine at all.
Its a balancing act - we were right to use it in January as our cases were very high and it has undoubtedly saved lives. We are now in a different place, hence the chance for under 30 year olds to choose something else when their time comes. And the US may not use it either, as they have enough from Pfizer and Moderna not to need it.
@DavidL are you expecting the SNP to get a majority?
Its going to be close. I think (hope) that they will fall just short but their little green helpers will get them over the line once again. I expect the Tories to fall back a bit, possibly to 3rd and Labour to pick up a bit but not necessarily win many more seats.
Most of the campaigning seems to revolve around the regional list vote, where the MSM and broadcasters are continuing to blank the Alba party. Salmond needs something to give them a second push. I expect an assault on all the lead SNP candidate in the regional lists, all of whom IIRC received a tiny proportion of members' votes, but have been advanced to the top as preferred BAME/disabled status (self ID'd or not).
That would be interesting. Salmond must be getting just a little bit desperate. He is an ego maniac and he is seriously in danger of being completely humiliated. He may well lash out at some point.
But the campaign has been almost non existent. Which has suited Nicola just fine of course.
Like a lot of pols I believe Salmond, wily campaigner though he is, has been listening to ill chosen advisors & believed twitter was real life. He's maybe been out of the ring too long.
'You're a big man, but you're in bad shape. With me it's a full time job. Now behave yourself.'
I haven't been following it but I did catch a few of his interviews at the start and it seemed to me he had a potential comms problem with the "sex pest" thing. Every interviewer was asking him if he had reflected on his behaviour and felt there were lessons there (for him) as regards future interactions with women. Clearly angling for something like "Of course I did nothing criminal, a court has confirmed that, but yes I've reflected long and hard, and yes I can see that perhaps I did occasionally behave in a way that made people uncomfortable, and I'm sorry if that was the case, and I have absolutely taken this on board."
But he wouldn't go anywhere near it. All he kept doing was stone walling with "Court found me innocent. Court found me innocent. Court found me innocent". Refusing to acknowledge any territory existed between totally ok behaviour and criminal behaviour (when everyone knows that not only does such territory exist but that it's quite spacious).
I do get that it's a sensitive area and that his approach might be the only one he thought he could manage or risk, but it didn't come over well. Not to me it didn't anyway. And I thought to myself, mmm, this is a non answer to a big and juicy question, therefore it's probably going to keep coming back - a la Farron and gay sex - and maybe Alex would be better off biting the bullet and getting an answer sorted out.
So, I don't know if he has? Or has it gone away?
That's a fair characterisation of Salmond's reaction.
No, it hasn't gone away, but Alba & Salmond's exclusion from the debates (which is their latest cry of IT'S NO BLOODY FAIR!) has prevented it being addressed, and I'm fairly sure he'd have carried on with the found innocent of every charge line in any case. Salmond's personal ratings in polling implies that the damage is pretty fixed in folks' minds.
As you suggest even a modest admission of naughty behaviour would probably have worked for him. No one is expecting him to spend the rest of his earthly existence working in a leper colony but 'admitting fallibility isn't a sign of weakness' is a lesson Salmond is never going to learn.
Getting the Telegraph, Spectator, Brillo and David fucking Davis out to bat for you was also a major error. If an aversion to populist politics reeking of rancid testosterone, Tories and Brexit are a driving force in Scottish politics, distancing yourself from that fester fest would have been a smart move.
Well I can't say I'm heartbroken if he's flopping. Especially if he's hanging with that crowd. Going by the betting it's looking pretty good for your preferred outcome of a 'clean' SNP majority. Game on if so and we'll see which of our many "scotch" experts have called the consequences right. Legal ref? Illegal ref? No ref? UDI? Gunboats from Boris? Nicola and her team go to ground armed and "hit the mattresses" in Glasgow? The mind boggles at the possibilities.
There is a third trap for Starmer, and perhaps the biggest one of all. That is that Labour is as corrupt as the Conservatives are. So, while it may be tempting to do his duty as LOTO and make hay on this particular scandal, rather too many people remember New Labour's record in office. And there's no reason to think that Whatever-Labour-Starmer-Leads would be any better in government. Although, because government under Starmer would probably be bigger, there would be correspondingly more opportunities for public sector corruption.
Starmer should definitely go after this scandal - as LOTO it's his duty, and, let's face it, he hasn't made much of an impact elsewhere. But I don't think it will necessarily be in his long- or even medium-term interests to do so.
Come off it. This lot are in a different league. When you think about what someone like David Blunkett resigned over its absolutely trifling in comparison to the stuff this lot regularly get away with.
I've not been looking forward to this week as its not enough for me.
I have no interest in sitting outside in a beer garden while its cold. I'll be honest, I never did that in normal years anyway. In a beer garden when its sunny and warm - not much better than that - but in this weather? Its shit, I'd go indoors but no that's that's still illegal.
We're currently supposed to be grateful for the scraps of civil liberties we're restored? No, I'll pass. This is not good enough while cases, deaths, hospitalisations are so low, there is zero risk of the NHS being overwhelmed and the vulnerable are vaccinated already.
The 17 May one, that's the one I'm looking forward to, but it is where we should be today already.
This week is just not good enough, I'm not going to pretend to be happy with these scraps. 👎.
Completely agree Philip ... I'm glad it's not just me. Solidarity mon brave.
The justification for May 17th can be seen in the ONS antibody survey (repost from Andy Cooke) -
The idea is clearly that by getting the 2nd doses in the older population done, and a large chunk of those for the younger groups *and* getting vaccinations down into the mid/low 40s, to maximise protection for the most vulnerable groups before opening things out further.
How's that a justification?
The justification for lockdown was to prevent the NHS being overwhelmed. The NHS isn't being overwhelmed. The 99% who were vulnerable to dying have all been offered a vaccine already.
We can't and shouldn't have zero-risk, its just time to get on with it.
Go look at Brazil or Chile. The idea that younger people aren't effected by COVID, is ignorant, stupid, garbage.
We are not in herd immunity. Yet. Otherwise hospitalisation (for one) would have collapsed. It hasn't.
If we simply lift all restrictions now. hospitalisation R will rise above 1.
We're not Brazil or Chile, we're not starting from their point and they don't have our vaccines (Chile is using almost glorified saline not our vaccines).
I never said the young weren't vulnerable, I said they weren't that the 99% vulnerable to dying which is true. A key to remember is that in that 99% is the vulnerable young who have been vaccinated.
Hospitalisation figures have collapsed. They're nothing like what they were.
The figures from Chile are quite clear - they are protecting the vaccinated, though less well than here. The hospitals are filling with younger people, who are not vaccinated.
The groups being protected has done a high proportion of the dying so far. But if you fill the hospitals with younger people, that will change.
That is what will happen here, in short order, if you simply lift restrictions. R will go to 1.2+ and the rest will follow.
You're tilting at windmills. Who is proposing we "simply lift restrictions"?
There is a difference between simply lifting all restrictions including quarantining at the border, opening nightclubs etc - and saying it should not be illegal to go into a relatives living room. Or that restaurants and pubs should not be closed by law (indoors).
If we were to go to Stage 3 restrictions domestically sooner, but postpone the Stage 3 opening of the border until the rest of the world has caught up with us, then that would be smarter for preventing the virus here. Data not dates, the data says domestic is safer but abroad is not.
Ah yes, the list of "These things are obviously safe".
The funny thing is that if you sum up the lists of "These things are obviously safe" for everyone you get a list of.... everything.
Hospital R is currently banging around 0.8 - with the schools closed. What are you proposing to do that will only move R by 0.2 or less?
I never said they were "obviously safe".
Schools aren't closed, schools are open. Schools reopened over a month ago. As for what I am proposing, I would bring forward the domestic element of the Stage 3 restrictions to no later than the end of the month, which would be 3 weeks after the Phase I rollout was completed.
But I would balance that by postponing the lifting of restrictions on travel due for the middle of May. I would add every nation with a case rate double ours per capita (or insufficient testing to accurately measure their case rate) to the red list, which is pretty much all of Europe.
Stop cases coming in from where they are, rather than spreading where they aren't.
Schools are in the process of re-opening after the break. The last time they were open, R increased. When they open again, R will probably increase.
Hospitalisations have a lag between date of infection and day of hospitalisation, people don't go to hospital on the day they get infected. So your hospitalisation R almost entirely in recent periods relates to when schools were open, not closed.
Your hospitalisation R never increased to 1, indeed it didn't come close to 1 - and the rates of vaccination have only ever increased from there.
I'm not sure you've understood R. Unless I'm very much mistaken, it's a measure of infection spread, not just a general concept of how much a quantity is increasing/decreasing. Hence, there's no such thing as "hospitalisation R".
That too is my understanding. Isn’t it how many people one infected person infects? So under R 0.8 every ten people infects eight more and so on...
The R derived from hospitalisation is a useful measure of the current growth rate of serious disease. What we can look out for is the the case rate R going above 1 over the next few weeks but the R derived from the hospitalisation rate staying below 1. We've already observed this once with schools reopening and the 29th unlockdown step. I think we will have a small rise in the R from hospital admissions a week or so after a much bigger rise and panic from the case R going above 1.
Did we ever have real case rate R going above 1 with schools reopening? I thought ONS and other surveys said no.
The only reason cases recorded ever went above R of 1, very briefly, was that we added around a million tests per day, but still even with all those extra tests they struggled to find many extra cases and then the decline in cases continued.
Apologies, I know I've posted this before but I feel it gives a useful, if necessarily speculative, indication of the impact of lockdown easing and vaccination roll-out on R.
And here's how it is turning out so far:
(Courtesy steve jackson@goalprojection on Twitter)
That lower graph really is quite an amazing fit of model to data, particularly if he has not tweaked it and it is data versus prediction (i.e. not against revised model).
It's impressive, albeit everything from before the 27th of February was what went into it.
However, since then, it's matched nicely. This is where it started:
He has, quite rightly, been tracking the errors since the model, and they look pretty decent, which does support the projection going forwards (at the moment!)
Sorry but that doesn't look that impressive. The expected figure 3 days ago for instance was 33% higher than the real figure. Indeed that figure essentially arrived a full fortnight ahead of schedule.
When you're dealing with small numbers its easier to overlook the errors but if someone had a model saying 400 deaths and the outturn was 300, with 300 not expected until a full fortnight later, I doubt you'd be so quick to say it was pretty decent.
So the UK is tracking as doing better than his "highly effective" model, yet still based on data not dates it is illegal to go into somebody else's home?
Afternoon. The Danish news is a rather shocking: not using the AZ vaccine at all.
I don't think they're actually concluding it's unsafe for use, though. Aren't they actually just saying that their level of reliance on AZ is very low (it delays them a fortnight not to use it as they've gone big on Pfizer) and case rate is also pretty low, so they have the luxury of being able to pass on it with limited downside. I think they've said that, if cases rise significantly, they'd reverse their decision and use it.
It's not great in the sense it could undermine confidence in countries using AZ. But I see from the Danes' purely selfish perspective why they'd make that call.
The financial markets really are a different world to us mere mortals.
At times I struggle to understand it, and I've been working in the banking/financial services sector for a decade this coming September.
Which probably something the Head of Regulatory Affairs SHOULD NOT admit to.
It is not too crazy if you look at everything in entirety.
First, money is cheap, is likely to remain cheap and a number of asset classes (cash, bonds and now property) are out of bounds because returns will be non-existent. So money has to go somewhere.
Second, the stock market reflects the value of companies, not necessarily the wider economy. In the past, it might have been the domestic economy was crap but a firm sold a lot overseas so it wasn't exposed, or that its product wasn't necessarily cyclical. But increasingly the story is about more share of wealth going to companies over (certainly) workers and, to a degree, Governments (because, in many cases, they are paying lower taxes). That doesn't look to be changing.
Third, the share price reflects predicted future profits. So you can get tech companies at crazy valuations but, if you think we are on the cusp of a revolution and these companies will benefit, they don't look so crazy on future earnings (look at the PEG ratio). Which is why all these efficiency software tools have rocketed - the market believes the way in which we work is being transformed and we are the start of that process, with a lot more to go. The winners will make out like bandits
PS on the third point, it's why I am negative on the future for many people economically - a lot of tasks will be replaced.
Explain NFTs!
I mean where's the fucking value in buying a £20 phone (current price in CEX) for £3 million because some third rate celebrity once sent out a tweet on that phone?
@DavidL are you expecting the SNP to get a majority?
Its going to be close. I think (hope) that they will fall just short but their little green helpers will get them over the line once again. I expect the Tories to fall back a bit, possibly to 3rd and Labour to pick up a bit but not necessarily win many more seats.
Most of the campaigning seems to revolve around the regional list vote, where the MSM and broadcasters are continuing to blank the Alba party. Salmond needs something to give them a second push. I expect an assault on all the lead SNP candidate in the regional lists, all of whom IIRC received a tiny proportion of members' votes, but have been advanced to the top as preferred BAME/disabled status (self ID'd or not).
That would be interesting. Salmond must be getting just a little bit desperate. He is an ego maniac and he is seriously in danger of being completely humiliated. He may well lash out at some point.
But the campaign has been almost non existent. Which has suited Nicola just fine of course.
Like a lot of pols I believe Salmond, wily campaigner though he is, has been listening to ill chosen advisors & believed twitter was real life. He's maybe been out of the ring too long.
'You're a big man, but you're in bad shape. With me it's a full time job. Now behave yourself.'
I haven't been following it but I did catch a few of his interviews at the start and it seemed to me he had a potential comms problem with the "sex pest" thing. Every interviewer was asking him if he had reflected on his behaviour and felt there were lessons there (for him) as regards future interactions with women. Clearly angling for something like "Of course I did nothing criminal, a court has confirmed that, but yes I've reflected long and hard, and yes I can see that perhaps I did occasionally behave in a way that made people uncomfortable, and I'm sorry if that was the case, and I have absolutely taken this on board."
But he wouldn't go anywhere near it. All he kept doing was stone walling with "Court found me innocent. Court found me innocent. Court found me innocent". Refusing to acknowledge any territory existed between totally ok behaviour and criminal behaviour (when everyone knows that not only does such territory exist but that it's quite spacious).
I do get that it's a sensitive area and that his approach might be the only one he thought he could manage or risk, but it didn't come over well. Not to me it didn't anyway. And I thought to myself, mmm, this is a non answer to a big and juicy question, therefore it's probably going to keep coming back - a la Farron and gay sex - and maybe Alex would be better off biting the bullet and getting an answer sorted out.
So, I don't know if he has? Or has it gone away?
That's a fair characterisation of Salmond's reaction.
No, it hasn't gone away, but Alba & Salmond's exclusion from the debates (which is their latest cry of IT'S NO BLOODY FAIR!) has prevented it being addressed, and I'm fairly sure he'd have carried on with the found innocent of every charge line in any case. Salmond's personal ratings in polling implies that the damage is pretty fixed in folks' minds.
As you suggest even a modest admission of naughty behaviour would probably have worked for him. No one is expecting him to spend the rest of his earthly existence working in a leper colony but 'admitting fallibility isn't a sign of weakness' is a lesson Salmond is never going to learn.
Getting the Telegraph, Spectator, Brillo and David fucking Davis out to bat for you was also a major error. If an aversion to populist politics reeking of rancid testosterone, Tories and Brexit are a driving force in Scottish politics, distancing yourself from that fester fest would have been a smart move.
Well I can't say I'm heartbroken if he's flopping. Especially if he's hanging with that crowd. Going by the betting it's looking pretty good for your preferred outcome of a 'clean' SNP majority. Game on if so and we'll see which of our many "scotch" experts have called the consequences right. Legal ref? Illegal ref? No ref? UDI? Gunboats from Boris? Nicola and her team go to ground armed and "hit the mattresses" in Glasgow? The mind boggles at the possibilities.
My preferred option is for Nicola to do as she has said she will and to continue the covid battle, and then seek a Section 30 agreement in 2022/2023
I would like that to be discussed calmly and respectably in the HOC and then put to a free vote
I think it is unlikely to receive HOC approval, but even then I do not fear indyref2 and am confident it can be won by the union
The one thing everyone should agree is this cannot continue indefinitely
There is a third trap for Starmer, and perhaps the biggest one of all. That is that Labour is as corrupt as the Conservatives are. So, while it may be tempting to do his duty as LOTO and make hay on this particular scandal, rather too many people remember New Labour's record in office. And there's no reason to think that Whatever-Labour-Starmer-Leads would be any better in government. Although, because government under Starmer would probably be bigger, there would be correspondingly more opportunities for public sector corruption.
Starmer should definitely go after this scandal - as LOTO it's his duty, and, let's face it, he hasn't made much of an impact elsewhere. But I don't think it will necessarily be in his long- or even medium-term interests to do so.
Come off it. This lot are in a different league. When you think about what someone like David Blunkett resigned over its absolutely trifling in comparison to the stuff this lot regularly get away with.
I love this.. you are bigger crooks than we are 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Comments
Barclays Plc shares briefly dropped almost 10% in the opening minutes of Wednesday’s session, the most intraday in more than a year, in what traders said was likely due to an error known as a “fat finger.”
The stock entered a volatility auction at about 8:06 a.m. in London after two trades totaling about 48,000 shares at a price of 168.40 pence, according to Bloomberg data. The shares quickly recovered after the five-minute pause and were down 0.3% to 186.32 pence at midday.
Wednesday’s apparent error briefly trimmed about 3.2 billion pounds ($4.4 billion) from the bank’s market capitalization.
About two years ago, a fat finger was cited for an 83% drop in shares of investment firm Jardine Matheson Holdings Ltd. in Singapore, while in 2018, BNP Paribas Securities was blamed for erroneous orders that knocked almost 10% off the value of Taiwan-listed Formosa Petrochemical Corp.
While erroneous trades are sometimes canceled, there were no cancelations for Barclays as of midday, Bloomberg data show. The day’s low, according to the data, matched that shown on the London Stock Exchange website.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-04-14/barclays-declines-9-9-most-in-a-year
*Spare a thought for the poor compliance and legal teams that have to investigate this.
I did like this observation in The Times
“It looks like a fatty,” said one City trader. “Someone was obviously in the pub last night,” they added, tongue in cheek.
(Update: Ish)
Thanks, @Cyclefree .
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-03-31/what-are-fat-fingers-and-why-don-t-they-go-away-quicktake
It’s just difficult to think of what they could do that would be worse than what they’ve done. That’s the only example I could come up with.
Traders are nearly as arrogant and full of legendary modesty as lawyers, for them to make a mistake is unpossible for them.
Odd.
Particularly as the risk from a second shot of AZN, if you didn't experience the very rare side effect form the first shot, is much lower still.
But not, AIUI, in this case.
The investigation alone will ensure that.
But still, the link was close enough to amuse me.
The question of lobbying however, is a very complex one and it is not entirely malign, much as simplistic journos and lefties would like us to all believe. Lobbying is, in fact, if it is regulated properly, a perfectly proper part of politics and its relationship with business. The reality is most civil servants have not the first clue how the private sector works. If there were no lobbying (if it were essentially outlawed) there would certainly be very bad laws enacted that seemed very laudable to the man/woman in the street but none the less might result in very bad unintended consequences for industry, possibly resulting in loss of international competitiveness and loss of jobs. People who are trained in what may be referred to as "government affairs" in many corporates are invaluable to the companies and by extension to UK plc. generally. These matters are often more complex than they first appear.
And I came up with, from a tweet by an antivaxxer months ago, the idea of injecting large quantities of neat virus into people to build immunity that way.
Now, of course, it would have the desired effect after a fashion, but at far higher risk of something going disastrously wrong than using a vaccine where usually the virus is either dead, or weakened.
Of course, ironically, by cocking up their vaccine rollout that is de facto if not de jure the strategy they have adopted...
Anyway, glad you were amused, which was the secondary point of it.
The real cost of the error is the traded shares (48,000) multiplied by the error (18p) = £8,640 isn't it?
An 8k error is still uncomfortable for whoever has to "please explain" but its not like billions were really 'wiped out'.
Or is it just a grisly coincidence?
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1382314564738506759?s=19
From yesterday.
Barclays Share Price At a Key Level Ahead of Wall Street earnings
https://www.investingcube.com/barclays-share-price-at-a-key-level-ahead-of-wall-street-earnings-shares/
It would be a disorderly market. And the FCA and regulators in general really, really hate disorderly markets.
The firm would have to show it had controls in place to prevent it. I haven't seen the details but if it was one guy pressing the wrong button that sounds strange. If he was buying way below the market so what he sits in the order book. If he was selling he should have been filled at the bid down to his size.
Sounds algo-ish.
@TSE what actually happened?
The senior detective who led an ill-fated fraud investigation into the takeover of Rangers FC has denied chanting songs associated with the club in front of a witness.
Detective Chief Inspector Jim Robertson, 53, said that he may have “referenced” a song called The Billy Boys but did not sing the controversial anthem while in the company of Philip Duffy, an employee with Duff and Phelps, the financial services firm that managed the Rangers administration.
Robertson said he may have mentioned the meaning of a codename for the Rangers administration case used by David Grier, a business consultant. The codename was Project William, which Robertson said was a reference to William of Orange. He said he had learnt about the name when taking a statement from Paul Clark, a former Rangers administrator who was arrested during the investigation and later cleared of criminal wrongdoing.
He added: “I took a statement from Paul Clark in 2012 and I was aware of different project names being given to the files that were being given — so the Murray Group had Project Blue which related to Rangers Football Club then it changed to Project Charlotte; the scenario being Sir David Murray’s offices being in Charlotte Square in Edinburgh.” Murray is a former chairman of Rangers.
Robertson added: “Then when the club was going into administration and they were going to administrators, they decided to change it from Project Charlotte and David Grier came up with a name and his name was Project William. When Paul Clark mentioned it to me, he laughed when he was giving his statement. During his time as an administrator coming from the south of England he had learned the connotations of the name William in relation to William of Orange, King Billy etc and the song The Billy Boys — that was discussed and it was David Grier who named that.
“Now he would have had knowledge in my opinion because David Grier told us he was a Rangers fan and that he grew up in Barrhead outside Glasgow. He would have known that and to us was his private joke.
“During this inquiry, I was asking certain individuals of the connotations of the Project William name.
“I may have mentioned that to Phil Duffy about the William name and the connotations of the name and I may have referenced the Rangers song The Billy Boys in relation to that.
“But I did not stand up and chant The Billy Boys.”
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/officer-denies-singing-billy-boys-anthem
I don't know why but it reminded me of Trainspotting 2.
Starmer should definitely go after this scandal - as LOTO it's his duty, and, let's face it, he hasn't made much of an impact elsewhere. But I don't think it will necessarily be in his long- or even medium-term interests to do so.
2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 287 535.0828 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1830 3411.852 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:09.490 GBX 186.44 1328 2475.9232 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 272 507.008 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1776 3310.464 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:10.137 GBX 186.4 1550 2889.2 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 2078 3873.8076 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:21.740 GBX 186.42 1026 1912.6692 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.4 2859 5329.176 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:33.667 GBX 186.38 2293 4273.6934 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 2475 4612.41 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 904 1684.6944 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:34.827 GBX 186.36 205 382.038 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:37.263 GBX 186.339 3 5.59017 Off-Book XLON P
2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 3220 5998.86 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 1032 1922.616 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 506 942.678 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:45.010 GBX 186.3 2000 3726 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 3000 5587.8 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:48.337 GBX 186.26 2000 3725.2 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1017 1894.671 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1972 3673.836 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:52.007 GBX 186.3 1086 2023.218 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T08:06:52.043 GBX 186.26 1916 3568.7416 AT XLON P ALGO
I almost would prefer a few Alba SMPs to create an internal struggle within the pro-referendum parties.
And as you say price doesn't seem bonkers - must be A TON more!!
However in the clip which accompanied the piece Starmer quoted the "Shoplifters Defence" a phrase which would, for a variety of reasons, be understood by most of a wider audience.
It's a good sign.
From what I've read and heard, it is a transposition error that hasn't been reversed/cancelled.
I think given the way the share price of Barclays has gone in the last year, a fall today may have triggered some other moves elsewhere, FOMO might be behind it.
No, it hasn't gone away, but Alba & Salmond's exclusion from the debates (which is their latest cry of IT'S NO BLOODY FAIR!) has prevented it being addressed, and I'm fairly sure he'd have carried on with the found innocent of every charge line in any case. Salmond's personal ratings in polling implies that the damage is pretty fixed in folks' minds.
As you suggest even a modest admission of naughty behaviour would probably have worked for him. No one is expecting him to spend the rest of his earthly existence working in a leper colony but 'admitting fallibility isn't a sign of weakness' is a lesson Salmond is never going to learn.
Getting the Telegraph, Spectator, Brillo and David fucking Davis out to bat for you was also a major error. If an aversion to populist politics reeking of rancid testosterone, Tories and Brexit are a driving force in Scottish politics, distancing yourself from that fester fest would have been a smart move.
2021-04-14T07:06:19.403 GBX 168.4 42100 70896.4 AT XLON P ALGO
2021-04-14T07:06:19.403 GBX 168.4 5900 9935.6 AT XLON P ALGO
We are basically in agreement with EMA's assessment regarding the AstraZeneca vaccine. That is why it is important to emphasise that it is still an approved vaccine. And I understand if other countries in a different situation than us choose to continue using the vaccine. If Denmark were in a completely different situation and in the midst of a violent third outbreak, for example, and a healthcare system under pressure – and if we had not reached such an advanced point in our rollout of the vaccines – then I would not hesitate to use the vaccine, even if there were rare but severe complications associated with using it," says Søren Brostrøm.
Full release:
https://www.sst.dk/en/english/news/2021/denmark-continues-its-vaccine-rollout-without-the-covid-19-vaccine-from-astrazeneca
Do you have the before and after?
Which probably is something the Head of Regulatory Affairs SHOULD NOT admit to.
2 systems
1 patient
3 jabs
2 systems dont talk to each other tried to cancel via 119 and Swiftqueue and GP
Apparently it is not possible.and a completely insurmountable task.
@Philip_Thompson said
I don't think that's right. The national case rate now is back to what it was in August last year.
Please can you say when and where it became illegal to enter other people's homes with a local case rate around half what they are today.
I replied:
So, to take my own example, on July 30th last year it became illegal in Kirklees to meet in private homes or gardens. The rolling case rate in the borough at that time - and testing has significantly ramped up at that point - was around 24 per 100000 residents. Nationally, we are now at 28 per 100000 residents now (locally in Kirklees 72 per 100k) and it is now permitted to meet in gardens.
You can probably kick around various factors at the edges of those stats if you like, but lockdown regulations were being actively introduced at current case levels.
I am off to find a homeless person to donate it to!!
As Shaun Bailey says, the homeless can afford to save and buy a house.
First, money is cheap, is likely to remain cheap and a number of asset classes (cash, bonds and now property) are out of bounds because returns will be non-existent. So money has to go somewhere.
Second, the stock market reflects the value of companies, not necessarily the wider economy. In the past, it might have been the domestic economy was crap but a firm sold a lot overseas so it wasn't exposed, or that its product wasn't necessarily cyclical. But increasingly the story is about more share of wealth going to companies over (certainly) workers and, to a degree, Governments (because, in many cases, they are paying lower taxes). That doesn't look to be changing.
Third, the share price reflects predicted future profits. So you can get tech companies at crazy valuations but, if you think we are on the cusp of a revolution and these companies will benefit, they don't look so crazy on future earnings (look at the PEG ratio). Which is why all these efficiency software tools have rocketed - the market believes the way in which we work is being transformed and we are the start of that process, with a lot more to go. The winners will make out like bandits
PS on the third point, it's why I am negative on the future for many people economically - a lot of tasks will be replaced.
I mean where's the fucking value in buying a £20 phone (current price in CEX) for £3 million because some third rate celebrity once sent out a tweet on that phone?
Where people might get fed up is if there is a sense that opinion forming and resulting action is markedly different if you are a billionaire, or if you know the minister's mobile number.
"Now we all know that expenses has dominated politics for the last year. But if anyone thinks that cleaning up politics means dealing with this alone and then forgetting about it, they are wrong. Because there is another big issue that we can no longer ignore.
"It is the next big scandal waiting to happen. It’s an issue that crosses party lines and has tainted our politics for too long, an issue that exposes the far-too-cosy relationship between politics, government, business and money.
"I’m talking about lobbying – and we all know how it works. The lunches, the hospitality, the quiet word in your ear, the ex-ministers and ex-advisors for hire, helping big business find the right way to get its way. In this party, we believe in competition, not cronyism. We believe in market economics, not crony capitalism. So we must be the party that sorts all this out.
"Now, I want to be clear: it’s not just big business that gets involved in lobbying. Charities and other organisations, including trade unions, do it too. What’s more, when it's open and transparent, when people know who is meeting who, for what reason and with what outcome, lobbying is perfectly reasonable.
"It’s important that businesses, charities and other organisations feel they can make sure their voice is heard. And indeed, lobbying often makes for better, more workable, legislation. But I believe that it is increasingly clear that lobbying in this country is getting out of control.
"Today it is a £2 billion industry that has a huge presence in Parliament. The Hansard Society has estimated that some MPs are approached over one hundred times a week by lobbyists. Much of the time this happens covertly.
"We don’t know who is meeting whom. We don’t know whether any favours are being exchanged. We don’t know which outside interests are wielding unhealthy influence. This isn’t a minor issue with minor consequences. Commercial interests - not to mention government contracts - worth hundreds of billions of pounds are potentially at stake.
"I believe that secret corporate lobbying, like the expenses scandal, goes to the heart of why people are so fed up with politics. It arouses people’s worst fears and suspicions about how our political system works, with money buying power, power fishing for money and a cosy club at the top making decisions in their own interest.
"We can’t go on like this. I believe it’s time we shone the light of transparency on lobbying in our country and forced our politics to come clean about who is buying power and influence."
(part 1)
https://conservative-speeches.sayit.mysociety.org/speech/601536
"Politics should belong to people, not big business or big unions, and we need to sort this out. So if we win the election, we will take a lead on this issue by making sure that ex-ministers are not allowed to use their contacts and knowledge - gained while being paid by the public to serve the public - for their own private gain.
"Today, the guidelines state that former ministers shouldn't lobby government for at least twelve months after leaving office. We will start by doubling that to two years.
"But there's another problem. Those guidelines are simply that: guidance issued to ex-ministers by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments, explaining what kind of jobs they can take up. Today, ex-Ministers can ignore this advice without sanction.
"So we will rewrite the Ministerial Code to make clear that anyone who ignores the advice of the Committee will be forced to give up some or all of their Ministerial pension. Dealing with the lobbying issue may be painful, but it needs to happen and because we are from a new generation at ease with openness and accountability, because we believe in social responsibility not state control, we will clean things up.
"So that is the choice the country faces. Five more years of Gordon Brown blocking reform, whether it's money from big business or money from big unions. Or reform to clean up lobbying from a new Conservative government committed to transparency and accountability."
https://conservative-speeches.sayit.mysociety.org/speech/601536
But MrEd explains it - people are looking for any place they can put money because there isn't anywhere sane that offers the return they expect for the risk they perceive they are being tasked to take.
Or are you, so long as it isn't "woke"?
I suspect Johnson will be quite content for Cameron to carry the can. Like he did with the Japanese schoolboy all those years ago he will play the man and not the ball.
Doesn't it just mean Citi are now the lender of $500m to Revlon...
The Angel Of Corbridge in Northumberland has apologised and offered free drinks to 78-year-old David Walters, who complained to a newspaper after he was refused service. The widower did not have a smartphone and therefore was unable to register his details with NHS Test and Trace."
https://news.sky.com/story/covid-news-live-latest-updates-as-scientists-very-concerned-about-about-cluster-of-south-african-variant-cases-in-london-12275017
More like a herd, crazed by thirst, encountering a waterhole and a pack of lions ?
When you're dealing with small numbers its easier to overlook the errors but if someone had a model saying 400 deaths and the outturn was 300, with 300 not expected until a full fortnight later, I doubt you'd be so quick to say it was pretty decent.
So the UK is tracking as doing better than his "highly effective" model, yet still based on data not dates it is illegal to go into somebody else's home?
It's not great in the sense it could undermine confidence in countries using AZ. But I see from the Danes' purely selfish perspective why they'd make that call.
Its just a glorified version of collectibles isn't it?
I would like that to be discussed calmly and respectably in the HOC and then put to a free vote
I think it is unlikely to receive HOC approval, but even then I do not fear indyref2 and am confident it can be won by the union
The one thing everyone should agree is this cannot continue indefinitely
2491 new cases and 38 deaths
Surge testing announced in N3