politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Sky Bet decision that points to problems for sites like PB
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Sky Bet decision that points to problems for sites like PB
Affiliates are third-party companies who work on commission for gambling retailers by directing traffic (customers) to their sites. In the last few years the use of affiliate companies has vastly increased due to the tighter regulation and rising cost of traditional advertising. A 2015 study by the IAB (Interactive Advertising Bureau) estimates that over £16.5bn worth of sales were the result of this performance based marketing.
Comments
-
First!!0
-
I have no idea to what extent PB is dependent on affiliate marketing. Is the thread header saying is PB at risk?0
-
Tele didn't get the 'more optimism' memo, obvs.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/9196671533343498240 -
You should have seen the headlines it had planned before the memo arrived!Theuniondivvie said:Tele didn't get the 'more optimism' memo, obvs.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/9196671533343498240 -
Affiliate Manager = Alastair Meeks new pseudonym?0
-
After the header, I am little wiser.Benpointer said:I have no idea to what extent PB is dependent on affiliate marketing. Is the thread header saying is PB at risk?
0 -
Even more reason then not to pay 50 to 100 billion to the EUTheuniondivvie said:Tele didn't get the 'more optimism' memo, obvs.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/9196671533343498240 -
Nationwide Red warning now. All schools and colleges to close.
Not sure if this is a new Tory policy so they dont have to put taxes up for the rich or something to do with the weather0 -
I am always grateful to thread header writers, it is a difficult and sometimes thankless task, but I must confess this one is a hard read.foxinsoxuk said:
After the header, I am little wiser.Benpointer said:I have no idea to what extent PB is dependent on affiliate marketing. Is the thread header saying is PB at risk?
0 -
Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.0
-
That is genuinely frightening on many levels. We are not in a great place. Makes No Deal even more suicidal, of course.Theuniondivvie said:Tele didn't get the 'more optimism' memo, obvs.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/919667153334349824
0 -
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/9196712652999680000 -
-
willianglenn - has this changed - "The starkest example of this imperialist domination is coffee. In 2014 Africa —the home of coffee— earned just £1.5 billion from the crop. Yet Germany, a leading processor, earned nearly double that from coffee re-exports.
The reason for this is that Africa is punished by the EU with a 7.5 per cent tariff charge on roasted coffee but non-decaffeinated green coffee is exempt. As a result, the bulk of Africa’s export to the EU is unroasted green coffee and German manufacturers reap the rewards.
The charge on cocoa is even more debilitating as the EU tariff charge is a massive30 per cent for processed cocoa products like chocolate bars or cocoa powder, and 60 per cent for some other refined products containing cocoa.
Calestous Juma insists that the impact of such charges goes well beyond lost export opportunities. “They suppress technological innovation and industrial development among African countries.
“The practice denies the continent the ability to acquire, adopt and diffuse technologies used in food processing. It explains to some extent the low level of investment in Africa’s food processing enterprises,” he says.
"0 -
There is a Nationwide Red Warning, but you’ve got the wrong nation(s). It is for Ireland.bigjohnowls said:Nationwide Red warning now. All schools and colleges to close.
Not sure if this is a new Tory policy so they dont have to put taxes up for the rich or something to do with the weather
We can still blame the Tories, though, can’t we? They haven’t issued a Red Warning because they don’t care whether the poor get blown away by the hurricane.
0 -
It wasn't true when it was written. 7.5% is the EU WTO Most Favoured Nation tariff for coffee which doesn't apply to any country in Africa. There's a factual explanation here, which does also go into the tariff escalation issue. (Strangely this piece was even cited in Calestous Juma's article which suggests he didn't read it properly.)PAW said:willianglenn - has this changed
http://www.ico.org/documents/icc-107-7e-tariffs-trade.pdf0 -
In the past 3 years more than half the revenue that funds the site has come from affiliate income. If that is cut we might have to explore other ways of keeping going.Benpointer said:I have no idea to what extent PB is dependent on affiliate marketing. Is the thread header saying is PB at risk?
PB's affiliate income is, as you'd expect, a lot higher in years when there've been big elections. If there is little of interest to bet on then it declines sharply.
0 -
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/919671265299968000
0 -
Does make you wonder how reliable our forecasts and economic data is when the ONS can make some huge revisions just like that. Our immigration data remains mainly based on people with clipboards at airports doing sample surveys updated on census data that has the capacity to miss out large numbers of people in HMOs and overcrowded housing or the transient who don't or won't engage.SouthamObserver said:
That is genuinely frightening on many levels. We are not in a great place. Makes No Deal even more suicidal, of course.Theuniondivvie said:Tele didn't get the 'more optimism' memo, obvs.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/919667153334349824
What actually are the true figures for anything?0 -
Between the original and revised?brendan16 said:
Does make you wonder how reliable our forecasts and economic data is when the ONS can make some huge revisions just like that. Our immigration data remains mainly based on people with clipboards at airports doing sample surveys updated on census data that has the capacity to miss out large numbers of people in HMOs and overcrowded housing or the transient who don't or won't engage.SouthamObserver said:
That is genuinely frightening on many levels. We are not in a great place. Makes No Deal even more suicidal, of course.Theuniondivvie said:Tele didn't get the 'more optimism' memo, obvs.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/919667153334349824
What actually are the true figures for anything?0 -
No 50 to 100 billion euros payments to the EU, an end to free movement and no ECJ jurisdiction, that is what they promised and that is what the Tories will likely fight the next general election on. If Corbyn wants to fight on paying 50 to 100 billion euros to the EU for a deal (which would probably require free movement left unchecked and full ECJ jurisdiction too and a semi permanent transition period given it took Canada 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU) he is welcome to. I doubt he would given his Brexit sympathies but it would at least give the electorate a real choiceSouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/9196712652999680000 -
On topic
I signed up to 4 or 5 betting sites pre-GE 17, but I am afraid it never occurred to me to use the links which I now see on the right of the page; they are too discreet, esp when using a tablet or phone.0 -
And Rich people's schools will be fine due to boarding!YBarddCwsc said:
There is a Nationwide Red Warning, but you’ve got the wrong nation(s). It is for Ireland.bigjohnowls said:Nationwide Red warning now. All schools and colleges to close.
Not sure if this is a new Tory policy so they dont have to put taxes up for the rich or something to do with the weather
We can still blame the Tories, though, can’t we? They haven’t issued a Red Warning because they don’t care whether the poor get blown away by the hurricane.0 -
Ok thanks Mike. I presume the others will wait to see how SkyBet fares?MikeSmithson said:
In the past 3 years more than half the revenue that funds the site has come from affiliate income. If that is cut we might have to explore other ways of keeping going.Benpointer said:I have no idea to what extent PB is dependent on affiliate marketing. Is the thread header saying is PB at risk?
PB's affiliate income is, as you'd expect, a lot higher in years when there've been big elections. If there is little of interest to bet on then it declines sharply.0 -
Won't it be a bit late for all that by the next election?HYUFD said:
No 50 to 100 billion euros payments to the EU, an end to free movement and no ECJ jurisdiction, that is what they promised and that is what the Tories will likely fight the next general election on. If Corbyn wants to fight on paying 50 to 100 billion euros to the EU for a deal (which would probably require free movement left unchecked and full ECJ jurisdiction too and a semi permanent transition period given it took Canada 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU) he is welcome to. I doubt he would given his Brexit sympathies but it would at least give the electorate a real choiceSouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/9196712652999680000 -
Sunlit uplands, higher wages, lower prices, more public spending. Time to deliver.HYUFD said:
No 50 to 100 billion euros payments to the EU, an end to free movement and no ECJ jurisdiction, that is what they promised and that is what the Tories will likely fight the next general election on. If Corbyn wants to fight on paying 50 to 100 billion euros to the EU for a deal (which would probably require free movement left unchecked and full ECJ jurisdiction too and a semi permanent transition period given it took Canada 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU) he is welcome to. I doubt he would given his Brexit sympathies but it would at least give the electorate a real choiceSouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/919671265299968000
0 -
Michael Fish has assured me there's not going to be a hurricaneYBarddCwsc said:
There is a Nationwide Red Warning, but you’ve got the wrong nation(s). It is for Ireland.bigjohnowls said:Nationwide Red warning now. All schools and colleges to close.
Not sure if this is a new Tory policy so they dont have to put taxes up for the rich or something to do with the weather
We can still blame the Tories, though, can’t we? They haven’t issued a Red Warning because they don’t care whether the poor get blown away by the hurricane.
0 -
Agreed. But even if the UK agreed to pay the sums demanded by the EU, it seems unlikely that there will be any sort of deal in place by March 2019. The most we can expect is some sort of promise to talk about a deal.SouthamObserver said:
That is genuinely frightening on many levels. We are not in a great place. Makes No Deal even more suicidal, of course.Theuniondivvie said:Tele didn't get the 'more optimism' memo, obvs.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/919667153334349824
So the choices are:-
1. No deal at all
2. Paying up and still have no deal. Possibly some transitional arrangement might be agreed.
3. Reversing our position and saying that we won’t leave the SM or customs union but will leave the EU’s political structures. This would be in line - technically - with the referendum result but not what many of those who voted Leave expected. It would take a huge amount of courage and persuasive ability to get this through.
4. Withdrawing our Article 50 letter. Almost certainly not legally possible and, more importantly, probably also politically impossible in the UK.
Wharever route is taken, tough times ahead, methinks. Certainly in the short-term.
(Perhaps we need some off the wall thinking. Maybe Mrs May could pick up on Juncker’s recent statement that Britain should be thanked for what it did in the war but that it was now time to pay and say that that bill would be settled once the European countries had paid what they owed Britain for what it did for them in the war.
) 0 -
As it happens we won't feel much from SkyBet because its political markets have been very patchy. My worry is if other firms close them down.Benpointer said:
Ok thanks Mike. I presume the others will wait to see how SkyBet fares?MikeSmithson said:
In the past 3 years more than half the revenue that funds the site has come from affiliate income. If that is cut we might have to explore other ways of keeping going.Benpointer said:I have no idea to what extent PB is dependent on affiliate marketing. Is the thread header saying is PB at risk?
PB's affiliate income is, as you'd expect, a lot higher in years when there've been big elections. If there is little of interest to bet on then it declines sharply.0 -
Give the ONS a chance. It's extremely difficult to track flows of this nature,
particularly when we host the world's most important financial centre. If we still had exchange controls it would be a lot easier.
On that note, good night!
0 -
How about a tenner per 1000 posts? I'd be game. Plus, would give new meaning to "Spend a Penny!"MikeSmithson said:
In the past 3 years more than half the revenue that funds the site has come from affiliate income. If that is cut we might have to explore other ways of keeping going.Benpointer said:I have no idea to what extent PB is dependent on affiliate marketing. Is the thread header saying is PB at risk?
PB's affiliate income is, as you'd expect, a lot higher in years when there've been big elections. If there is little of interest to bet on then it declines sharply.0 -
Alistair Darling managed it between two statements to the House.....Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
0 -
If Labour won the next general election post Brexit on a platform of paying 100 billion Euros to the EU, keeping full free movement and ECJ jurisdiction I expect the EU would happily consider a dealStereotomy said:
Won't it be a bit late for all that by the next election?HYUFD said:
No 50 to 100 billion euros payments to the EU, an end to free movement and no ECJ jurisdiction, that is what they promised and that is what the Tories will likely fight the next general election on. If Corbyn wants to fight on paying 50 to 100 billion euros to the EU for a deal (which would probably require free movement left unchecked and full ECJ jurisdiction too and a semi permanent transition period given it took Canada 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU) he is welcome to. I doubt he would given his Brexit sympathies but it would at least give the electorate a real choiceSouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/9196712652999680000 -
A correction to your post. Almost all African countries are exempted from tariffs on these products. You are quoting the EU's MFN tariffs (as Jacob Ress-Mogg did in his talk), but they don't apply to the least developed countries and more developed countries with PTAs with the EU will typically have reduced or zero tariffs as well. The point doesn't stand. African countries may find it difficult to produce and export processed coffee but it isn't a tariff issue. It isn't helpful to apply the wrong remedy to a problem. It's probably a marketing issue in fact.PAW said:willianglenn - has this changed - "The starkest example of this imperialist domination is coffee. In 2014 Africa —the home of coffee— earned just £1.5 billion from the crop. Yet Germany, a leading processor, earned nearly double that from coffee re-exports.
The reason for this is that Africa is punished by the EU with a 7.5 per cent tariff charge on roasted coffee but non-decaffeinated green coffee is exempt. As a result, the bulk of Africa’s export to the EU is unroasted green coffee and German manufacturers reap the rewards.
The charge on cocoa is even more debilitating as the EU tariff charge is a massive30 per cent for processed cocoa products like chocolate bars or cocoa powder, and 60 per cent for some other refined products containing cocoa.
Calestous Juma insists that the impact of such charges goes well beyond lost export opportunities. “They suppress technological innovation and industrial development among African countries.
“The practice denies the continent the ability to acquire, adopt and diffuse technologies used in food processing. It explains to some extent the low level of investment in Africa’s food processing enterprises,” he says.
"0 -
I shifted the majority of my equities into foreign assets, or British companies that earn mostly overseas over a year ago. I large part this was as a hedge against Sterling devaluation, but as I am clearly not the only one doing this, it does become rather self fulfilling.SouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/919671265299968000
Presumably the steep rise in UK gold exports shows in these figures too.
http://news.sky.com/story/revealed-how-gold-takes-the-shine-off-britains-trade-figures-110575450 -
The Leave vote was never about the economy, that was the Remain vote.SouthamObserver said:
Sunlit uplands, higher wages, lower prices, more public spending. Time to deliver.HYUFD said:
No 50 to 100 billion euros payments to the EU, an end to free movement and no ECJ jurisdiction, that is what they promised and that is what the Tories will likely fight the next general election on. If Corbyn wants to fight on paying 50 to 100 billion euros to the EU for a deal (which would probably require free movement left unchecked and full ECJ jurisdiction too and a semi permanent transition period given it took Canada 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU) he is welcome to. I doubt he would given his Brexit sympathies but it would at least give the electorate a real choiceSouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/919671265299968000
The top 2 reasons given by Leave voters for voting Leave were 'The principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK' and 'Voting to Leave offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.'
The top 2 reasons given by Remain voters for voting Remain were 'The risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices' and 'Access to the EU single market, while out of the Euro and no-borders areas, giving the best of both worlds'
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/0 -
Second election in a row in Austria where the next day postals could make an important difference. Last time they decided the winner of the presidential election, this time who comes second in the legislative election.0
-
Yikes0
-
When all options are absurd in differing ways, we can be certain that something absurd will happen.Cyclefree said:
Agreed. But even if the UK agreed to pay the sums demanded by the EU, it seems unlikely that there will be any sort of deal in place by March 2019. The most we can expect is some sort of promise to talk about a deal.SouthamObserver said:
That is genuinely frightening on many levels. We are not in a great place. Makes No Deal even more suicidal, of course.Theuniondivvie said:Tele didn't get the 'more optimism' memo, obvs.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/919667153334349824
So the choices are:-
1. No deal at all
2. Paying up and still have no deal. Possibly some transitional arrangement might be agreed.
3. Reversing our position and saying that we won’t leave the SM or customs union but will leave the EU’s political structures. This would be in line - technically - with the referendum result but not what many of those who voted Leave expected. It would take a huge amount of courage and persuasive ability to get this through.
4. Withdrawing our Article 50 letter. Almost certainly not legally possible and, more importantly, probably also politically impossible in the UK.
Wharever route is taken, tough times ahead, methinks. Certainly in the short-term.
(Perhaps we need some off the wall thinking. Maybe Mrs May could pick up on Juncker’s recent statement that Britain should be thanked for what it did in the war but that it was now time to pay and say that that bill would be settled once the European countries had paid what they owed Britain for what it did for them in the war. )0 -
Prepared to expand on that at all kle?kle4 said:Yikes
0 -
Having drunk Malawian Tea and Coffee, proceessed there I can confirm its poor quality. both taste of dust.FF43 said:
A correction to your post. Almost all African countries are exempted from tariffs on these products. You are quoting the EU's MFN tariffs (as Jacob Ress-Mogg did in his talk), but they don't apply to the least developed countries and more developed countries with PTAs with the EU will typically have reduced or zero tariffs as well. The point doesn't stand. African countries may find it difficult to produce and export processed coffee but it isn't a tariff issue. It isn't helpful to apply the wrong remedy to a problem. It's probably a marketing issue in fact.PAW said:willianglenn - has this changed - "The starkest example of this imperialist domination is coffee. In 2014 Africa —the home of coffee— earned just £1.5 billion from the crop. Yet Germany, a leading processor, earned nearly double that from coffee re-exports.
The reason for this is that Africa is punished by the EU with a 7.5 per cent tariff charge on roasted coffee but non-decaffeinated green coffee is exempt. As a result, the bulk of Africa’s export to the EU is unroasted green coffee and German manufacturers reap the rewards.
The charge on cocoa is even more debilitating as the EU tariff charge is a massive30 per cent for processed cocoa products like chocolate bars or cocoa powder, and 60 per cent for some other refined products containing cocoa.
Calestous Juma insists that the impact of such charges goes well beyond lost export opportunities. “They suppress technological innovation and industrial development among African countries.
“The practice denies the continent the ability to acquire, adopt and diffuse technologies used in food processing. It explains to some extent the low level of investment in Africa’s food processing enterprises,” he says.
"
Malawian Gin is rather good though (and has a cult following amongst expats) and the beer is quite palatable.0 -
No matter. Promises were made. Time for Johnson and Gove to deliver what they told voters would happen and to own the consequences.HYUFD said:
The Leave vote was never about the economy, that was the Remain vote.SouthamObserver said:
Sunlit uplands, higher wages, lower prices, more public spending. Time to deliver.HYUFD said:
No 50 to 100 billion euros payments to the EU, an end to free movement and no ECJ jurisdiction, that is what they promised and that is what the Tories will likely fight the next general election on. If Corbyn wants to fight on paying 50 to 100 billion euros to the EU for a deal (which would probably require free movement left unchecked and full ECJ jurisdiction too and a semi permanent transition period given it took Canada 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU) he is welcome to. I doubt he would given his Brexit sympathies but it would at least give the electorate a real choiceSouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/919671265299968000
The top 2 reasons given by Leave voters for voting Leave were 'The principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK' and 'Voting to Leave offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.'
The top 2 reasons given by Remain voters for voting Remain were 'The risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices' and 'Access to the EU single market, while out of the Euro and no-borders areas, giving the best of both worlds'
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
0 -
https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/747000584226607104HYUFD said:The Leave vote was never about the economy
0 -
As the figures I gave showed the '£350 million for the NHS' was not one of the main reasons for voting Leave, they were restoring sovereignty and reducing immigration.Scott_P said:
https://twitter.com/MichaelPDeacon/status/747000584226607104HYUFD said:The Leave vote was never about the economy
That poster was just a Cummings stunt
0 -
I understand why you say this but, with all due respect, I think it’s silly.SouthamObserver said:
No matter. Promises were made. Time for Johnson and Gove to deliver what they told voters would happen and to own the consequences.HYUFD said:
The Leave vote was never about the economy, that was the Remain vote.SouthamObserver said:
Sunlit uplands, higher wages, lower prices, more public spending. Time to deliver.HYUFD said:
No 50 to 100 billion euros payments to the EU, an end to free movement and no ECJ jurisdiction, that is what they promised and that is what the Tories will likely fight the next general election on. If Corbyn wants to fight on paying 50 to 100 billion euros to the EU for a deal (which would probably require free movement left unchecked and full ECJ jurisdiction too and a semi permanent transition period given it took Canada 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU) he is welcome to. I doubt he would given his Brexit sympathies but it would at least give the electorate a real choiceSouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI ....Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
The top 2 reasons given by Leave voters for voting Leave were 'The principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK' and 'Voting to Leave offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.'
The top 2 reasons given by Remain voters for voting Remain were 'The risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices' and 'Access to the EU single market, while out of the Euro and no-borders areas, giving the best of both worlds'
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
At a time like this what we really need are politicians with the courage to spell out the real choices we face, the consequences of each and to push through the best option we have available, doubtless in the face of a lot of sniping from their own side.
What we don’t need is more game-playing.
Our trouble is that we don’t have such politicians around.
Anyway, feeling a bit achey and fluey this evening so will say goodnight and hooe that a decent night’s sleep will sort matters.0 -
They must deliver regained sovereignty and an end to free movement, I agreeSouthamObserver said:
No matter. Promises were made. Time for Johnson and Gove to deliver what they told voters would happen and to own the consequences.HYUFD said:
The Leave vote was never about the economy, that was the Remain vote.SouthamObserver said:
Sunlit uplands, higher wages, lower prices, more public spending. Time to deliver.HYUFD said:
No 50 to 100 billion euros payments to the EU, an end to free movement and no ECJ jurisdiction, that is what they promised and that is what the Tories will likely fight the next general election on. If Corbyn wants to fight on paying 50 to 100 billion euros to the EU for a deal (which would probably require free movement left unchecked and full ECJ jurisdiction too and a semi permanent transition period given it took Canada 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU) he is welcome to. I doubt he would given his Brexit sympathies but it would at least give the electorate a real choiceSouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/919671265299968000
The top 2 reasons given by Leave voters for voting Leave were 'The principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK' and 'Voting to Leave offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.'
The top 2 reasons given by Remain voters for voting Remain were 'The risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices' and 'Access to the EU single market, while out of the Euro and no-borders areas, giving the best of both worlds'
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/0 -
Checking the figures, I discovered roasted coffee in Germany comes with a whopping €2.19/kg duty in addition to VAT at 7%. Instant coffee attracts a €4.78 /kg duty. The UK has 0% VAT and no duty on coffee. Good smuggling opportunity there, I think.FF43 said:
A correction to your post. Almost all African countries are exempted from tariffs on these products. You are quoting the EU's MFN tariffs (as Jacob Ress-Mogg did in his talk), but they don't apply to the least developed countries and more developed countries with PTAs with the EU will typically have reduced or zero tariffs as well. The point doesn't stand. African countries may find it difficult to produce and export processed coffee but it isn't a tariff issue. It isn't helpful to apply the wrong remedy to a problem. It's probably a marketing issue in fact.PAW said:willianglenn - has this changed - "The starkest example of this imperialist domination is coffee. In 2014 Africa —the home of coffee— earned just £1.5 billion from the crop. Yet Germany, a leading processor, earned nearly double that from coffee re-exports.
The reason for this is that Africa is punished by the EU with a 7.5 per cent tariff charge on roasted coffee but non-decaffeinated green coffee is exempt. As a result, the bulk of Africa’s export to the EU is unroasted green coffee and German manufacturers reap the rewards.
The charge on cocoa is even more debilitating as the EU tariff charge is a massive30 per cent for processed cocoa products like chocolate bars or cocoa powder, and 60 per cent for some other refined products containing cocoa.
Calestous Juma insists that the impact of such charges goes well beyond lost export opportunities. “They suppress technological innovation and industrial development among African countries.
“The practice denies the continent the ability to acquire, adopt and diffuse technologies used in food processing. It explains to some extent the low level of investment in Africa’s food processing enterprises,” he says.
"
Edit Latvia is even worse. 21% VAT plus €142/100kg duty0 -
Yep, among other things. Those sunlit uplands are calling.HYUFD said:
They must deliver regained sovereignty and an end to free movement, I agreeSouthamObserver said:
No matter. Promises were made. Time for Johnson and Gove to deliver what they told voters would happen and to own the consequences.HYUFD said:
The Leave vote was never about the economy, that was the Remain vote.SouthamObserver said:
Sunlit uplands, higher wages, lower prices, more public spending. Time to deliver.HYUFD said:
No 50 to 100 billion euros payments to the EU, an end to free movement and no ECJ jurisdiction, that is what they promised and that is what the Tories will likely fight the next general election on. If Corbyn wants to fight on paying 50 to 100 billion euros to the EU for a deal (which would probably require free movement left unchecked and full ECJ jurisdiction too and a semi permanent transition period given it took Canada 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU) he is welcome to. I doubt he would given his Brexit sympathies but it would at least give the electorate a real choiceSouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/919671265299968000
The top 2 reasons given by Leave voters for voting Leave were 'The principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK' and 'Voting to Leave offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.'
The top 2 reasons given by Remain voters for voting Remain were 'The risks of voting to leave the EU looked too great when it came to things like the economy, jobs and prices' and 'Access to the EU single market, while out of the Euro and no-borders areas, giving the best of both worlds'
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/
0 -
Those were the two main things Leave voters voted for, those 2 must be delivered after Leave's victory.SouthamObserver said:
Yep, among other things. Those sunlit uplands are calling.HYUFD said:
They must deliver regained sovereignty and an end to free movement, I agreeSouthamObserver said:
No matter. Promises were made. Time for Johnson and Gove to deliver what they told voters would happen and to own the consequences.HYUFD said:
The Leave vote was never about the economy, that was the Remain vote.SouthamObserver said:
Sunlit uplands, higher wages, lower prices, more public spending. Time to deliver.HYUFD said:
No 50 to 100 billion euros payments to the EU, an end to free movement and no ECJ jurisdiction, that is what they promised and that is what the Tories will likely fight the next general election on. If Corbyn wants to fight on paying 50 to 100 billion euros to the EU for a deal (which would probably require free movement left unchecked and full ECJ jurisdiction too and a semi permanent transition period given it took Canada 7 years to negotiate a deal with the EU) he is welcome to. I doubt he would given his Brexit sympathies but it would at least give the electorate a real choiceSouthamObserver said:
Explains Hammond's demeanour. Like Darling in 07/08 he has seen the full figures. Darling was criticised for his pessimism too, if I remember correctly. It really is time to handover to Boris and Gove. They need to own this and deliver what they promised.foxinsoxuk said:
It sounds as if the main thing is the reversal of flow of FDI, but also a large move away from Sterling assets.Casino_Royale said:Maybe I'm missing something, but I'm baffled as to how the ONS can misaccount for almost half a trillion pounds of assets.
https://twitter.com/StGeorgeOfEU/status/919671265299968000
The top 2 reasons given by Leave voters for voting Leave were 'The principle that decisions about the UK should be taken in the UK' and 'Voting to Leave offered the best chance for the UK to regain control over immigration and its own borders.'
The top 2 reasons given by Remain voters for
If and when voters decide they want to return to the single market, perhaps after a number of years of falling immigration leading to a more conciliatory approach to free movement, they can elect a party that will do so (probably requiring a post-Corbyn Labour leader to deliver it) but in the short term those are the 2 key priorities of Brexit0 -
We were always sovereign, and crashing the economy solves the immigration question, but it's sweet you think that will lead to adoring fans and not riots in the streets.HYUFD said:Those were the two main things Leave voters voted for, those 2 must be delivered after Leave's victory.
Bless.0 -
-
I voted for Remain, I am just telling you what 17 million Leave voters voted for in their own words.Scott_P said:
We were always sovereign, and crashing the economy solves the immigration question, but it's sweet you think that will lead to adoring fans and not riots in the streets.HYUFD said:Those were the two main things Leave voters voted for, those 2 must be delivered after Leave's victory.
Bless.
If you really want riots in the streets, ignoring the biggest democratic mandate since WW2 would be a good place to start.0 -
-
She will be told in no uncertain terms by Juncker and Barnier that even if talks on our future relationship with the EU were to start in January - which as I say is by no means certain - that relationship is seen by EU governments and officials as fraught with complexities and difficult-to-resolve issues of principle.
So for what it’s worth, the proposals in our recent position papers on everything from data flows to customs checks are seen as naive and unworkable - largely because we are perceived as not having accepted that we are to become a third party, a stranger to them, no longer a member of the family.
My powerful impression is that the rest of the EU sees the UK government as less hostile than it was, but considerably more muddled.
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-10-15/theresa-may-brexit-barnier-juncker/0 -
"There will be no Brexit without an almighty political crisis, whose form is yet to be determined."CarlottaVance said:0 -
And given the EU’s track record on deals for money, (“give us the money now, we’ll sort out the deal later”) looks like WTO Brexit here we come....williamglenn said:
"There will be no Brexit without an almighty political crisis, whose form is yet to be determined."CarlottaVance said:
0 -
Thank you for the link, most interesting.CarlottaVance said:...the proposals in our recent position papers on everything from data flows to customs checks are seen as naive and unworkable...
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-10-15/theresa-may-brexit-barnier-juncker/
I believe I said this when they released them. Indeed, it might have been you I said it to (in which case I apologise for the repetition) Damn, this is beginning to worry me...
0 -
BINO or WTO seems like the only two achievable options in the time available. Either one would probably bring down the government but the tories would, overall, prefer WTO on the basis that they want to watch the world burn with Corbyn as PM.CarlottaVance said:
And given the EU’s track record on deals for money, (“give us the money now, we’ll sort out the deal later”) looks like WTO Brexit here we come....williamglenn said:
"There will be no Brexit without an almighty political crisis, whose form is yet to be determined."CarlottaVance said:0 -
Yes it certainly looks like the British are much more ambitious/deluded while the EU27 are more recalcitrant/realistic (delete as appropriate).....viewcode said:
Thank you for the link, most interesting.CarlottaVance said:...the proposals in our recent position papers on everything from data flows to customs checks are seen as naive and unworkable...
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-10-15/theresa-may-brexit-barnier-juncker/
I believe I said this when they released them. Indeed, it might have been you I said it to (in which case I apologise for the repetition) Damn, this is beginning to worry me...0 -
Interesting Tele front page, firing a warning shot at Hammond before his budget.
Bullshit spin from Christopher Hope;
"Chancellor attempts to save his job by gambling on reforms aimed at 'inter-generational fairness'"
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-41631277
If he wanted to save his job, he'd be doing the exact opposite. He's trying to save the tory party from losing the next election.
I'm not sure he's strong enough to resist the pressure from the tory client vote right now. Abolishing/substantially reducing higher rate tax relief would finish him off, imo.0 -
The British economy is - what - £2 trillion, give or take a few.HYUFD said:
Even more reason then not to pay 50 to 100 billion to the EUTheuniondivvie said:Tele didn't get the 'more optimism' memo, obvs.
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/919667153334349824
Let's assume that in a Brexit deal world, the UK economy grows at 2.5% a year in perpetuity.
In a no deal world, it drops 2% in year one, then doesn't grow for two years, and then grows at 2.5% in perpetuity.
Which is better value for the UK taxpayer £100bn now, or no deal?
(As it happens, I don't believe the real bill will end up being anywhere near £100bn, as the "bill" includes contingent liabilities associated with the Irish bailout that will never be paid, and it ignores both assets and payments during the transitional period.)
But the point is a simple one: any bill must be seen in the context of the long term effects on the British economy.0 -
Brilliant: I'm stealing that.CarlottaVance said:
Yes it certainly looks like the British are much more ambitious/deluded while the EU27 are more recalcitrant/realistic (delete as appropriate).....viewcode said:
Thank you for the link, most interesting.CarlottaVance said:...the proposals in our recent position papers on everything from data flows to customs checks are seen as naive and unworkable...
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-10-15/theresa-may-brexit-barnier-juncker/
I believe I said this when they released them. Indeed, it might have been you I said it to (in which case I apologise for the repetition) Damn, this is beginning to worry me...0 -
(Reuters) - The Brexit worries of some of Britain's biggest businesses have eased slightly over the past three months and optimism is up from a low struck after June's unexpected election result, a survey by accountants Deloitte showed on Monday.
The poll of chief financial officers who make investment decisions at Britain's biggest companies showed that the proportion who think Brexit will damage the business environment dropped to 60 percent from 72 percent in the previous survey.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1CK0YT0 -
Duplicate0
-
As the CFO of a mid-sized British company (albeit one based in LA), Brexit has negatively affected our investment decisions somewhat.CarlottaVance said:(Reuters) - The Brexit worries of some of Britain's biggest businesses have eased slightly over the past three months and optimism is up from a low struck after June's unexpected election result, a survey by accountants Deloitte showed on Monday.
The poll of chief financial officers who make investment decisions at Britain's biggest companies showed that the proportion who think Brexit will damage the business environment dropped to 60 percent from 72 percent in the previous survey.
http://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKBN1CK0YT
But the decline in the value of sterling, and the fall in the rental price of London office space is working against that. People forgot how significant the automatic stabilisers in the modern economy are.
As a technology business, the biggest issues for us would be around the recruitment of developers and salespeople. If we do end up with a situation where it is difficult for us to get the right people in London, we would have to build up our European hubs more: there has been a lot of discussion internally about investing in either Berlin or (potentially as a low cost centre) Lisbon.
Our default assumption - and I'm sure this is shared by most companies - is that no deal is simply too expensive for both the EU and the UK.
My bigger concern than Brexit is a recession leading to a Corbyn government. I think that could do an enormous amount of damage.0 -
Goddamn you, I have to go to bed! I have to get up early tomorrow.rcs1000 said:The British economy is - what - £2 trillion, give or take a few.
Let's assume that in a Brexit deal world, the UK economy grows at 2.5% a year in perpetuity.
In a no deal world, it drops 2% in year one, then doesn't grow for two years, and then grows at 2.5% in perpetuity.
Which is better value for the UK taxpayer £100bn now, or no deal?
(As it happens, I don't believe the real bill will end up being anywhere near £100bn, as the "bill" includes contingent liabilities associated with the Irish bailout that will never be paid, and it ignores both assets and payments during the transitional period.)
But the point is a simple one: any bill must be seen in the context of the long term effects on the British economy.
OK:
Option1: Deal. Cost £100b, growth 2.5%pa
Option2: No deal, Cost 0, growth -2% yr 1, 0 yr 2 and 3, 2.5%pa thereafter.
Notes: Economy yr 0 £2000b, assume simple not compound growth.
Deal (yr vs economy)
1 £1900
2 £1948
3 £1996
4 £2042
5 £2090
Grows at £48b pa thereafter
No deal (yr vs economy)
1 £1960
2 £1960
3 £1960
4 £2009
5 £2058
Grows at £49b pa thereafter
Crossover is around year 38.
0 -
?viewcode said:
Goddamn you, I have to go to bed! I have to get up early tomorrow.rcs1000 said:The British economy is - what - £2 trillion, give or take a few.
Let's assume that in a Brexit deal world, the UK economy grows at 2.5% a year in perpetuity.
In a no deal world, it drops 2% in year one, then doesn't grow for two years, and then grows at 2.5% in perpetuity.
Which is better vAsalue for the UK taxpayer £100bn now, or no deal?
(As it happens, I don't believe the real bill will end up being anywhere near £100bn, as the "bill" includes contingent liabilities associated with the Irish bailout that will never be paid, and it ignores both assets and payments during the transitional period.)
But the point is a simple one: any bill must be seen in the context of the long term effects on the British economy.
OK:
Option1: Deal. Cost £100b, growth 2.5%pa
Option2: No deal, Cost 0, growth -2% yr 1, 0 yr 2 and 3, 2.5%pa thereafter.
Notes: Economy yr 0 £2000b, assume simple not compound growth.
Deal (yr vs economy)
1 £1900
2 £1948
3 £1996
4 £2042
5 £2090
Grows at £48b pa thereafter
No deal (yr vs economy)
1 £1960
2 £1960
3 £1960
4 £2009
5 £2058
Grows at £49b pa thereafter
Crossover is around year 38.
You've gone stark raving bonkers.
Firstly, Why would it grow at £48bn (or £49bn) thereafter? That would be a diminishing percentage growth, not 2.5%.
Secondly, £100bn payment does not mean the economy is £100bn smaller in perpetuity. It would be a one off payment in year one, not something that diminished the size of the economy in year two. (And should in any case be modelled as the cost of debt on £100bn.)0
