politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The other billionaire WH2020 hopeful spends some money and get
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The other billionaire WH2020 hopeful spends some money and gets some good early state polling numbers
So far I don’t think there has been a mention at all on PB of Tom Steyer even though he is still very much in the race for the Democratic nomination and is one of the select few who are still qualifying to take part in the TV debates.
Comments
-
First?0
-
Looks like Chris Tarrant's poorly older brother.....0
-
'I've never met her but'
It's now an immutable rule that anyone using the term 'woke' is a tosser.
https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1215323970565812224?s=200 -
Nice to see a genuine good guy single digit billionaire with a positive hopeful message.
I hope he does well and can shake up the race.0 -
He looks ok, his heart seems to be correctly located, and he's under 70.
His wife looks to be formidable too.
All these traits contrast with the present president.
They do have in common lack of political experience, but, again by contrast, the Steyers look to be capable of learning.0 -
The only forgiveable use of "woke" is as the opening word of a blues song.....Theuniondivvie said:'I've never met her but'
It's now an immutable rule that anyone using the term 'woke' is a tosser.
https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1215323970565812224?s=201 -
Eamonn Holmes has been a tosser for years, he supports Manchester United after all.Theuniondivvie said:'I've never met her but'
It's now an immutable rule that anyone using the term 'woke' is a tosser.
https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1215323970565812224?s=200 -
"weak, manipulative".Theuniondivvie said:'I've never met her but'
It's now an immutable rule that anyone using the term 'woke' is a tosser.
https://twitter.com/talkRADIO/status/1215323970565812224?s=20
0 -
I know most of pb will fight back against this but there is I feel a racial undertone to some of the abuse Meghan gets as well good old British classism.
It's hard to see it if you've never gone through it.0 -
Indeed.nunu2 said:I know most of pb will fight back against this but there is I feel a racial undertone to some of the abuse Meghan gets as well good old British classism.
It's hard to see it if you've never gone through it.
Anyone who obsesses about class has issues.
Some people cannot accept working class people doing well whilst their own lives are failures.
https://twitter.com/otto_english/status/1215390335515471872?s=210 -
Steyer was discussed yesterday iirc. Someone has backed him.0
-
Me.DecrepiterJohnL said:Steyer was discussed yesterday iirc. Someone has backed him.
1 -
I think it's more xenophobia - my mum openly admits that she doesn't like that Harry married an American. But then I doubt she cares much about Autumn Kelly (albeit that is a more minor royal marriage).nunu2 said:I know most of pb will fight back against this but there is I feel a racial undertone to some of the abuse Meghan gets as well good old British classism.
It's hard to see it if you've never gone through it.0 -
I’m sure there is some, esp on social media. But there is also some justified criticism. They seem unwilling to distinguish between the two.nunu2 said:there is I feel a racial undertone to some of the abuse Meghan gets as well good old British classism.
FPT:-
Morris_Dancer said:
“How they try and square the funding circle will determine public perceptions going forward, it seems.”
Exactly. I don’t think anyone sensible should have a problem with them living a private life, doing charitable stuff and/or earning a living (the Duke of Gloucester, for instance, worked as an architect), provided:-
1. They don’t also expect the public funding and privileges of being a royal (eg being gifted luxurious houses done up at public expense).
2. They don’t exploit their links with our Head of State In an unseemly manner to benefit themselves financially. Sussex biscuits are one thing. Selling access to Royals a la Fergie is not.
3. They take sensible advice about who they associate with - unlike, say, Andrew.
4. They understand that if they take public stances on matters of public interest, like anyone else doing so, they should expect comment and criticism. Just as Prince Charles has faced or anyone else in public life.
They should also display a bit more consideration for and politeness to HMQ. Issuing a statement mentioning her without informing her is very impolite and is deservedly criticised. Politeness costs nothing.
Their statement is a bit ambiguous on point 1. Half in / half out is not on.
It is not clear how they will address point 2.
They would be very well advised to take point 3 on board.
On 4 they seem to want to be able to speak but then claim harassment if people point out the obvious hypocrisy of, say, lecturing about climate change while flying in private jets.
And no - it is not just them. Charles rightly faced exactly the same criticism when years ago he visited Romania and had one of his Rolls Royces driven out there just so that he could loll around in it for a bit. So they need to be a bit more grown up about that. Meghan is American. She should understand the importance of a free press.
Watching celebrities using the press for their own purposes and then moaning when their PR campaigns don’t go to plan is one of the more nauseating spectacles of our time.
All these issues should now be addressed by them and the Palace quietly and quickly, a clear joint statement made and they get on with it. In the meanwhile leave them alone.
Personally I also think titles should not be bestowed on minor royals but only on those in the direct line of succession. The example of Princess Anne and her children should have been followed. All grandchildren etc should be commoners. Only the heirs should get a title. Only those heirs and those who actually work as Royals eg Anne should get any sort of funding and only for their work, not their lifestyles.4 -
Meghan wasn't raised in a cage.
The royals show just how malleable is the human brain, if you get them early, but not necessarily if the brain is tiny.0 -
@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?0
-
Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.0 -
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
0 -
There might be some sweet new buildings to officially open during the Brexit boom!Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
0 -
Indeed. It is curious watching some republicans go into bat for Harry and Meghan.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
Ultimately the Monarchy is an institution and it's about who they are and what they represent. Yes, they're expected to attend events and smile for photos, but that isn't really what they are being paid for.0 -
The default rate is your friend here then age of receivables then credit risk of the counterparty.Gallowgate said:Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.0 -
Assuming you can trust your credit management team, cash at bank and trade debtors are equal up to the point the invoice becomes due.Gallowgate said:Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.
Once a debt is overdue different issues occur.
I note that even after I wrote the second half of my first sentence I instantly added a proviso so in reality cash is king, any debt slightly less.0 -
Open car parks. Hold the hand of the sick. Turn up in flood and fire and rain. Be there. Be the unchanging anchor in a changing world. Just turn up.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
Not bog off to Los Angeles.0 -
A royal duty is visiting a school or town or factory or charidee event and having hundreds of people turn out who believe they have had a great and rewarding day. Ask Lt Cdr David Brannighan you uncouth jack you.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
0 -
They’re going into bat for Harry and Meghan because they know it upsets monarchists and will help undermine the institution as a whole.tlg86 said:
Indeed. It is curious watching some republicans go into bat for Harry and Meghan.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
Ultimately the Monarchy is an institution and it's about who they are and what they represent. Yes, they're expected to attend events and smile for photos, but that isn't really what they are being paid for.1 -
He'll be very well for your bank balancePulpstar said:Nice to see a genuine good guy single digit billionaire with a positive hopeful message.
I hope he does well and can shake up the race.
0 -
She doesn't even contact her family anymore.nunu2 said:I know most of pb will fight back against this but there is I feel a racial undertone to some of the abuse Meghan gets as well good old British classism.
It's hard to see it if you've never gone through it.0 -
In principle, the implied default rate (credit rating) on most of the debtor counterparties is likely to be higher than that of the bank; cash would ordinarily therefore be the more 'valuable' asset relative to face value. To be honest, though, it's very much at the margin - business valuation should be driven by the appropriate multiple of P&L/cash generation, plus surplus net assets. If there are liquidity issues one would expect this to lower the valuation multiple (and potentially require additional bad debt provisioning against trade debtors).Gallowgate said:Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.
It sounds as though you're trying to answer a slightly unusual question, though; can you provide more context?0 -
Although I like some of them, We actually don't need royals at all.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
0 -
The question specifies "subjective value". I think the points that you raise are objective considerations.eek said:
Assuming you can trust your credit management team, cash at bank and trade debtors are equal up to the point the invoice becomes due.Gallowgate said:Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.
Once a debt is overdue different issues occur.
I note that even after I wrote the second half of my first sentence I instantly added a proviso so in reality cash is king, any debt slightly less.
Subjectively, some people (the more cautious and prudently-minded) would value cash in the bank much more that a trade debt. Conversely, a person with a high risk mentality would be happier with debtors even though conversion to cash is not guaranteed.0 -
Or is s/he (?) trying to make an equivalence whereby £100 due in 30 days is worth 100 x (e to the minus one twelfth times the credit risk of the counterparty)?Animal_pb said:
In principle, the implied default rate (credit rating) on most of the debtor counterparties is likely to be higher than that of the bank; cash would ordinarily therefore be the more 'valuable' asset relative to face value. To be honest, though, it's very much at the margin - business valuation should be driven by the appropriate multiple of P&L/cash generation, plus surplus net assets. If there are liquidity issues one would expect this to lower the valuation multiple (and potentially require additional bad debt provisioning against trade debtors).Gallowgate said:Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.
It sounds as though you're trying to answer a slightly unusual question, though; can you provide more context?
Which would be a pretty agricultural way of assessing it.0 -
Saw this on the previous thread. We have our first poll in ~7 weeks without Biden leading. Ipsos have had much lower Biden numbers for a while though, and the shift from their previous poll is within the margin or error.
https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/12154504970853212170 -
Joanna Lumley as President of the Republic could do all of that with more charm and considerably less expense and drama.TOPPING said:
A royal duty is visiting a school or town or factory or charidee event and having hundreds of people turn out who believe they have had a great and rewarding day. Ask Lt Cdr David Brannighan you uncouth jack you.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
0 -
Oh and you know her and her family?TheGreenMachine said:
She doesn't even contact her family anymore.nunu2 said:I know most of pb will fight back against this but there is I feel a racial undertone to some of the abuse Meghan gets as well good old British classism.
It's hard to see it if you've never gone through it.0 -
Thank you @TOPPING, @eek, and @Animal_pb for your thoughts. They’re very interesting and there is plenty I hadn’t considered.
I’m actually answering a legal question about “consideration” in contract law and the rule in Foakes v Beer re. part-payment of a debt in return for a promise not to enforce said debt. (Basic stuff, I know...)
I’m framing my answer around commercial reality and just wanted to make sure the points I want to make regarding how “cash is king” are sound but I didn’t want to oversell the argument.0 -
This is very useful thank you.Stocky said:
The question specifies "subjective value". I think the points that you raise are objective considerations.eek said:
Assuming you can trust your credit management team, cash at bank and trade debtors are equal up to the point the invoice becomes due.Gallowgate said:Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.
Once a debt is overdue different issues occur.
I note that even after I wrote the second half of my first sentence I instantly added a proviso so in reality cash is king, any debt slightly less.
Subjectively, some people (the more cautious and prudently-minded) would value cash in the bank much more that a trade debt. Conversely, a person with a high risk mentality would be happier with debtors even though conversion to cash is not guaranteed.
Actually in my example I was working under the assumption that the trade debts were all past the due date.0 -
President Brian Blessed would do a better job.Dura_Ace said:
Joanna Lumley as President of the Republic could do all of that with more charm and considerably less expense and drama.TOPPING said:
A royal duty is visiting a school or town or factory or charidee event and having hundreds of people turn out who believe they have had a great and rewarding day. Ask Lt Cdr David Brannighan you uncouth jack you.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
The President’s Speech on Christmas Day would be the most watched show of the year.2 -
Or possibly that they find the whole cult of celebrity nauseous, and it matters not whether they are self-indulgent royals or wannabe celebs from TOWIECasino_Royale said:
They’re going into bat for Harry and Meghan because they know it upsets monarchists and will help undermine the institution as a whole.tlg86 said:
Indeed. It is curious watching some republicans go into bat for Harry and Meghan.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
Ultimately the Monarchy is an institution and it's about who they are and what they represent. Yes, they're expected to attend events and smile for photos, but that isn't really what they are being paid for.0 -
Ouch. Phil Collins gets to the meat of it:
"Emily Thornberry, whose leadership campaign is struggling to take wing, now declares that the people around Mr Corbyn worried her. This is the gang she was campaigning to put into Downing Street. It is a good thing the rest of us acted on what she thought rather than what she said. "
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ebb35fee-32fd-11ea-b8ef-1301adfca0801 -
Isn’t half the current problem that we have an actress in the family?Dura_Ace said:
Joanna Lumley as President of the Republic could do all of that with more charm and considerably less expense and drama.TOPPING said:
A royal duty is visiting a school or town or factory or charidee event and having hundreds of people turn out who believe they have had a great and rewarding day. Ask Lt Cdr David Brannighan you uncouth jack you.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
In reality, we either have royals or someone elected.0 -
They're all worth the same (£125k), but cash is a more liquid asset than debtors so superiorGallowgate said:Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.
That lot sums through to 61%. Only USA pollsters strip out the "Don't knows" - no idea why you'd do that unless you're assuming 100% turnout which is preposterous.Quincel said:Saw this on the previous thread. We have our first poll in ~7 weeks without Biden leading. Ipsos have had much lower Biden numbers for a while though, and the shift from their previous poll is within the margin or error.
https://twitter.com/PpollingNumbers/status/1215450497085321217
Sanders 28%
Biden 25%
Warren 16%
Bloomberg 10%
Buttigieg 8%
Yang 5%
Steyer 5%
Booker 3%
https://
fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/mkt/13/810
/808/Topline%20Reuters%202020%20Democratic%20Primary%20Tracker%2001%2009%202020.pdf
…0 -
Think of the expense of renaming all those ships.Dura_Ace said:
Joanna Lumley as President of the Republic could do all of that with more charm and considerably less expense and drama.TOPPING said:
A royal duty is visiting a school or town or factory or charidee event and having hundreds of people turn out who believe they have had a great and rewarding day. Ask Lt Cdr David Brannighan you uncouth jack you.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
0 -
Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.0 -
Take back control from our unelected rulers eh?Sandpit said:
Isn’t half the current problem that we have an actress in the family?Dura_Ace said:
Joanna Lumley as President of the Republic could do all of that with more charm and considerably less expense and drama.TOPPING said:
A royal duty is visiting a school or town or factory or charidee event and having hundreds of people turn out who believe they have had a great and rewarding day. Ask Lt Cdr David Brannighan you uncouth jack you.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
In reality, we either have royals or someone elected.0 -
We could have an elected monarch (on a fixed term) therefore no ship renaming required!TOPPING said:
Think of the expense of renaming all those ships.Dura_Ace said:
Joanna Lumley as President of the Republic could do all of that with more charm and considerably less expense and drama.TOPPING said:
A royal duty is visiting a school or town or factory or charidee event and having hundreds of people turn out who believe they have had a great and rewarding day. Ask Lt Cdr David Brannighan you uncouth jack you.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
0 -
No idea. Intuitively it sounds like a curve and they are asking about inflection points.Gallowgate said:Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.
Have you been told about the new study techniques the cool kids are using (and which does explain the part of grade inflation that is not due to easier questions and more motivated children)? Active recall, spaced repetition and so on? They might assume you know all this from school.
Also, google, youtube and wikipedia. Just googling your question comes up with Deloitte's thoughts on the matter.
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/in/Documents/risk/Corporate Governance/Audit Committee/in-gc-guality-of-financial-position-the-balance-sheet-and-beyond-noexp.pdf
(Interesting the URL has a g in quality -- dodgy ocr?)
But that is not the point. PB's experts can answer the question. Just checking you know to work smart, not hard. When I was first a student, it did not even occur to me to look at past papers!
0 -
More puff pieces for Steyer please.rottenborough said:0 -
Go on then, tell us what she should have done with Andrew.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.1 -
Hasn't Andy been effectively banished? No duties; no charity work; not even a royal mince pie at Christmas.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.1 -
10 active escort vessels at the moment. We'll have it done over the weekend.TOPPING said:
Think of the expense of renaming all those ships.Dura_Ace said:
Joanna Lumley as President of the Republic could do all of that with more charm and considerably less expense and drama.TOPPING said:
A royal duty is visiting a school or town or factory or charidee event and having hundreds of people turn out who believe they have had a great and rewarding day. Ask Lt Cdr David Brannighan you uncouth jack you.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
0 -
Although I like some of them, We actually don't need royals at all.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
Yes.nunu2 said:
Oh and you know her and her family?TheGreenMachine said:
She doesn't even contact her family anymore.nunu2 said:I know most of pb will fight back against this but there is I feel a racial undertone to some of the abuse Meghan gets as well good old British classism.
It's hard to see it if you've never gone through it.0 -
Sent him to America to co-operate with the law enforcement agencies & civil claims investigating Epstein and not let him back in the UK until everyone was happy that he had cooperated.tlg86 said:
Go on then, tell us what she should have done with Andrew.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.0 -
Thank you I appreciate the help. I have seen that paper from a Google search but I’m trying to frame my answer around “reality” rather than “per the book” therefore was more curious to hear some anecdotes and personal opinions as I know quite a few PBers work in business and finance.DecrepiterJohnL said:
No idea. Intuitively it sounds like a curve and they are asking about inflection points.Gallowgate said:Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.
Have you been told about the new study techniques the cool kids are using (and which does explain the part of grade inflation that is not due to easier questions and more motivated children)? Active recall, spaced repetition and so on? They might assume you know all this from school.
Also, google, youtube and wikipedia. Just googling your question comes up with Deloitte's thoughts on the matter.
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/in/Documents/risk/Corporate Governance/Audit Committee/in-gc-guality-of-financial-position-the-balance-sheet-and-beyond-noexp.pdf
(Interesting the URL has a g in quality -- dodgy ocr?)
But that is not the point. PB's experts can answer the question. Just checking you know to work smart, not hard. When I was first a student, it did not even occur to me to look at past papers!
As others have mentioned, different people with different risk aversions perhaps subjectively view these things differently.
I also assume different industries view these things differently. Ones with tighter margins and therefore higher likelihood of cash-flow problems probably but a great subjective value to cash.
All fuel for the fire!0 -
Err ? This is accounting not calculus !DecrepiterJohnL said:
No idea. Intuitively it sounds like a curve and they are asking about inflection points.0 -
Still gets paid to do bugger all for the Royal Family something the Queen apparently won’t do for the Sussexes.DecrepiterJohnL said:
Hasn't Andy been effectively banished? No duties; no charity work; not even a royal mince pie at Christmas.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.0 -
Andrew is guilty as we all know, he should be giving life or equivalent.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.0 -
Have they asked to interview him?TheScreamingEagles said:
Sent him to America to co-operate with the law enforcement agencies & civil claims investigating Epstein and not let him back in the UK until everyone was happy that he had cooperated.tlg86 said:
Go on then, tell us what she should have done with Andrew.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.
Given some of the stuff coming out of the US, I'm not sure the Americans want to get to the truth...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-510532050 -
I know that some of the victims and their legal teams want to speak to Prince Andrew.tlg86 said:
Have they asked to interview him?TheScreamingEagles said:
Sent him to America to co-operate with the law enforcement agencies & civil claims investigating Epstein and not let him back in the UK until everyone was happy that he had cooperated.tlg86 said:
Go on then, tell us what she should have done with Andrew.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.
Given some of the stuff coming out of the US, I'm not sure the Americans want to get to the truth...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-510532050 -
Is that like giving head? And what would "equivalent" be? And why haven't you told us how often Andrew contacts his family?TheGreenMachine said:
Andrew is guilty as we all know, he should be giving life or equivalent.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.0 -
So not what you said originally, glad we cleared that up.TheScreamingEagles said:
I know some of the victims and their legal teams want to speak to Prince Andrew.tlg86 said:
Have they asked to interview him?TheScreamingEagles said:
Sent him to America to co-operate with the law enforcement agencies & civil claims investigating Epstein and not let him back in the UK until everyone was happy that he had cooperated.tlg86 said:
Go on then, tell us what she should have done with Andrew.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.
Given some of the stuff coming out of the US, I'm not sure the Americans want to get to the truth...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-510532051 -
Nonsense on stilts because as @rcs1000 said in a completely different context, it is a forced choice. You can't have Corbyn without Seamus just as you can't have Boris without Dom, and just think how many Conservatives have doubts about him!rottenborough said:Ouch. Phil Collins gets to the meat of it:
"Emily Thornberry, whose leadership campaign is struggling to take wing, now declares that the people around Mr Corbyn worried her. This is the gang she was campaigning to put into Downing Street. It is a good thing the rest of us acted on what she thought rather than what she said. "
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ebb35fee-32fd-11ea-b8ef-1301adfca0801 -
He'd be a 'suicide' risk if he ever set foot in the US.TheScreamingEagles said:
Sent him to America to co-operate with the law enforcement agencies & civil claims investigating Epstein and not let him back in the UK until everyone was happy that he had cooperated.tlg86 said:
Go on then, tell us what she should have done with Andrew.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.0 -
DecrepiterJohnL said:
OKC Commented.Gallowgate said:Homework Help
But that is not the point. PB's experts can answer the question. Just checking you know to work smart, not hard. When I was first a student, it did not even occur to me to look at past papers!
We used to spend ages on past papers at school, especially in Botany & Zoology. I always wondered what the definitive essay in answer to each was.0 -
Inserting "that" after "know" would disambiguate that sentence.TheScreamingEagles said:
I know some of the victims and their legal teams want to speak to Prince Andrew.tlg86 said:
Have they asked to interview him?TheScreamingEagles said:
Sent him to America to co-operate with the law enforcement agencies & civil claims investigating Epstein and not let him back in the UK until everyone was happy that he had cooperated.tlg86 said:
Go on then, tell us what she should have done with Andrew.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.
Given some of the stuff coming out of the US, I'm not sure the Americans want to get to the truth...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-510532052 -
But, but but ,Dom, with Boris as front man, has just led them. to an amazing victory whereby they can stamp their (jack)boots on the opposition!DecrepiterJohnL said:
Nonsense on stilts because as @rcs1000 said in a completely different context, it is a forced choice. You can't have Corbyn without Seamus just as you can't have Boris without Dom, and just think how many Conservatives have doubts about him!rottenborough said:Ouch. Phil Collins gets to the meat of it:
"Emily Thornberry, whose leadership campaign is struggling to take wing, now declares that the people around Mr Corbyn worried her. This is the gang she was campaigning to put into Downing Street. It is a good thing the rest of us acted on what she thought rather than what she said. "
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ebb35fee-32fd-11ea-b8ef-1301adfca0800 -
It is what I said originally. The civil claims are coming from the victims of Epstein and their legal teams.tlg86 said:
So not what you said originally, glad we cleared that up.TheScreamingEagles said:
I know some of the victims and their legal teams want to speak to Prince Andrew.tlg86 said:
Have they asked to interview him?TheScreamingEagles said:
Sent him to America to co-operate with the law enforcement agencies & civil claims investigating Epstein and not let him back in the UK until everyone was happy that he had cooperated.tlg86 said:
Go on then, tell us what she should have done with Andrew.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.
Given some of the stuff coming out of the US, I'm not sure the Americans want to get to the truth...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-510532050 -
But not law enforcement.TheScreamingEagles said:
It is what I said originally. The civil claims are coming from the victims of Epstein and their legal teams.tlg86 said:
So not what you said originally, glad we cleared that up.TheScreamingEagles said:
I know some of the victims and their legal teams want to speak to Prince Andrew.tlg86 said:
Have they asked to interview him?TheScreamingEagles said:
Sent him to America to co-operate with the law enforcement agencies & civil claims investigating Epstein and not let him back in the UK until everyone was happy that he had cooperated.tlg86 said:
Go on then, tell us what she should have done with Andrew.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.
Given some of the stuff coming out of the US, I'm not sure the Americans want to get to the truth...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-510532051 -
What is Harry's carbon footprint, and Just how many Koalas has he killed with those monstrous emissions fuelling the climate energy for the Aussie bushfires ?0
-
Done.IshmaelZ said:
Inserting "that" after "know" would disambiguate that sentence.TheScreamingEagles said:
I know some of the victims and their legal teams want to speak to Prince Andrew.tlg86 said:
Have they asked to interview him?TheScreamingEagles said:
Sent him to America to co-operate with the law enforcement agencies & civil claims investigating Epstein and not let him back in the UK until everyone was happy that he had cooperated.tlg86 said:
Go on then, tell us what she should have done with Andrew.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.
Given some of the stuff coming out of the US, I'm not sure the Americans want to get to the truth...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-510532050 -
Remember: art not science!Gallowgate said:
Thank you I appreciate the help. I have seen that paper from a Google search but I’m trying to frame my answer around “reality” rather than “per the book” therefore was more curious to hear some anecdotes and personal opinions as I know quite a few PBers work in business and finance.DecrepiterJohnL said:
No idea. Intuitively it sounds like a curve and they are asking about inflection points.Gallowgate said:Homework Help
Would anyone be kind enough to offer some thoughts on at what point (if any) they would consider cash in the bank on a balance sheet having greater subjective value than its equivalent as an asset (trade debtor)?
For example, would a business that had 50k in cash and 75k in assets be worth more than a business that had 25k in cash and 100k in assets? What about 0 in cash and 125k in assets (cash-flow issues??)
Assuming the assets are all debts owed to the business. I’m thinking risk of recovery and the time-value of recovery.
Have you been told about the new study techniques the cool kids are using (and which does explain the part of grade inflation that is not due to easier questions and more motivated children)? Active recall, spaced repetition and so on? They might assume you know all this from school.
Also, google, youtube and wikipedia. Just googling your question comes up with Deloitte's thoughts on the matter.
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/in/Documents/risk/Corporate Governance/Audit Committee/in-gc-guality-of-financial-position-the-balance-sheet-and-beyond-noexp.pdf
(Interesting the URL has a g in quality -- dodgy ocr?)
But that is not the point. PB's experts can answer the question. Just checking you know to work smart, not hard. When I was first a student, it did not even occur to me to look at past papers!
As others have mentioned, different people with different risk aversions perhaps subjectively view these things differently.
I also assume different industries view these things differently. Ones with tighter margins and therefore higher likelihood of cash-flow problems probably but a great subjective value to cash.
All fuel for the fire!0 -
You should take Russell Howard's job.IshmaelZ said:
Is that like giving head? And what would "equivalent" be? And why haven't you told us how often Andrew contacts his family?TheGreenMachine said:
Andrew is guilty as we all know, he should be giving life or equivalent.TheScreamingEagles said:Interesting the Queen has come down much harder on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex than she has on the friend of the nonce Prince Andrew.
That tells you everything about the Queen’s moral fibre.
40 years or something would be the equivalent.0 -
2 -
No TV required. Just stand in your garden.....TheScreamingEagles said:
President Brian Blessed would do a better job.Dura_Ace said:
Joanna Lumley as President of the Republic could do all of that with more charm and considerably less expense and drama.TOPPING said:
A royal duty is visiting a school or town or factory or charidee event and having hundreds of people turn out who believe they have had a great and rewarding day. Ask Lt Cdr David Brannighan you uncouth jack you.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
The President’s Speech on Christmas Day would be the most watched show of the year.0 -
There you are now, Harry and his new wife.isam said:0 -
Is that the royal We?TheGreenMachine said:
Although I like some of them, We actually don't need royals at all.Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
1 -
Fake news. Harry has never auditioned for the Addams Family.TheGreenMachine said:
There you are now, Harry and his new wife.isam said:0 -
How do you know?Alphabet_Soup said:
Fake news. Harry has never auditioned for the Addams Family.TheGreenMachine said:
There you are now, Harry and his new wife.isam said:0 -
Yet.Alphabet_Soup said:
Fake news. Harry has never auditioned for the Addams Family.TheGreenMachine said:
There you are now, Harry and his new wife.isam said:0 -
Are the official receivers expanding? Or is it Customs booths that you have in mind?Gallowgate said:
There might be some sweet new buildings to officially open during the Brexit boom!Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
1 -
Correct but sources say he's very close to the ADAMS family as In Gerry.Alphabet_Soup said:
Fake news. Harry has never auditioned for the Addams Family.TheGreenMachine said:
There you are now, Harry and his new wife.isam said:0 -
I was right. Brexit is dropping down the agenda. I was ridiculed for this notion, mainly by ultra Remainers, but it’s happening. No one cares. Everyone is bored. Let the geeks sort it out
After we actually leave on Jan 31 it will vanish entirely as a first order issue0 -
Bless, you're forgetting that No Deal hasn't gone away.Byronic said:I was right. Brexit is dropping down the agenda. I was ridiculed for this notion, mainly by ultra Remainers, but it’s happening. No one cares. Everyone is bored. Let the geeks sort it out
After we actually leave on Jan 31 it will vanish entirely as a first order issue0 -
I see weirdo Clive Lewis has decided to open his leadership campaign calling for a referendum on the monarchy.
Just what the country is demanding right now!!!!! This will really get Labour back on track after their worst defeat since 1935.
Well done Clive!
1 -
A weirdo you say? I believe there are vacancies at No.10 for such people.GIN1138 said:I see weirdo Clive Lewis has decided to open his leadership campaign calling for a referendum on the monarchy.
Just what the country is demanding right now!!!!! This will really get Labour back on track after their worst defeat since 1935.
Well done Clive!1 -
That’s right, until things start to actually change in ways that normal people take for granted. Especially if there’s a recession. If Labour have a persuasive and effective enough leadership team that can reframe the issue so that the “common wisdom” is that Brexit is to blame, then everything is to play for.Byronic said:I was right. Brexit is dropping down the agenda. I was ridiculed for this notion, mainly by ultra Remainers, but it’s happening. No one cares. Everyone is bored. Let the geeks sort it out
After we actually leave on Jan 31 it will vanish entirely as a first order issue
I keep making the point that Brexit is abstract, even now. No one cares because it means different things to different people.
When it becomes real, with real effects, then who knows.
Obviously all of this is a moot point if RLB is Labour leader.0 -
Currently running down my No Deal food stash. Will have to restock next autumn.TheScreamingEagles said:
Bless, you're forgetting that No Deal hasn't gone away.Byronic said:I was right. Brexit is dropping down the agenda. I was ridiculed for this notion, mainly by ultra Remainers, but it’s happening. No one cares. Everyone is bored. Let the geeks sort it out
After we actually leave on Jan 31 it will vanish entirely as a first order issue0 -
It's very notable how the daily drip, drip, drip of negative Brexit stories on BBC/SKY/ITV has suddenly stopped since 12th Dec.Byronic said:I was right. Brexit is dropping down the agenda. I was ridiculed for this notion, mainly by ultra Remainers, but it’s happening. No one cares. Everyone is bored. Let the geeks sort it out
After we actually leave on Jan 31 it will vanish entirely as a first order issue1 -
Did he actually say that?GIN1138 said:I see weirdo Clive Lewis has decided to open his leadership campaign calling for a referendum on the monarchy.
Just what the country is demanding right now!!!!! This will really get Labour back on track after their worst defeat since 1935.
Well done Clive!
Monarchy referendum how good would that be?0 -
I was thinking about this earlier. As with Brexit, the question should not be “should we get rid of the monarchy?” But rather “what should we replace it with?”GIN1138 said:I see weirdo Clive Lewis has decided to open his leadership campaign calling for a referendum on the monarchy.
Just what the country is demanding right now!!!!! This will really get Labour back on track after their worst defeat since 1935.
Well done Clive!0 -
Would it be a once in a generation referendum, Clive?TheGreenMachine said:
Did he actually say that?GIN1138 said:I see weirdo Clive Lewis has decided to open his leadership campaign calling for a referendum on the monarchy.
Just what the country is demanding right now!!!!! This will really get Labour back on track after their worst defeat since 1935.
Well done Clive!
Monarchy referendum how good would that be?0 -
Well, there's a big ol' bridge from Scotland to NI in the pipeline, right?Foxy said:
Are the official receivers expanding? Or is it Customs booths that you have in mind?Gallowgate said:
There might be some sweet new buildings to officially open during the Brexit boom!Dura_Ace said:
WTF is a royal duty though? The country doesn't actually need any of them to do anything.Gallowgate said:@Cyclefree they could fulfil some royal duties in return for some royal funding?
0 -
As long as the EU haven't forgotten, all will be fine.....TheScreamingEagles said:
Bless, you're forgetting that No Deal hasn't gone away.Byronic said:I was right. Brexit is dropping down the agenda. I was ridiculed for this notion, mainly by ultra Remainers, but it’s happening. No one cares. Everyone is bored. Let the geeks sort it out
After we actually leave on Jan 31 it will vanish entirely as a first order issue0 -
Oh there's nothing wrong with weirdos, oddballs, fruitcakes, etc. The Great British eccentric is the stuff of legend after all and politics is full of them.rottenborough said:
A weirdo you say? I believe there are vacancies at No.10 for such people.GIN1138 said:I see weirdo Clive Lewis has decided to open his leadership campaign calling for a referendum on the monarchy.
Just what the country is demanding right now!!!!! This will really get Labour back on track after their worst defeat since 1935.
Well done Clive!
Generally they tend not to be leadership material though and when they do get into leadership positions the end result tends not to be good for them or their party. 0 -
0
-
Wasnt he the guy who was on the Andrew Neil show the other night. Completely weird.. i thought he might have been on uppers given his body language!!!GIN1138 said:I see weirdo Clive Lewis has decided to open his leadership campaign calling for a referendum on the monarchy.
Just what the country is demanding right now!!!!! This will really get Labour back on track after their worst defeat since 1935.
Well done Clive!0 -
Lol. You think the EU will allow a No Deal. They’re already talking about the EU asking for a transition even if we don’t want oneTheScreamingEagles said:
Bless, you're forgetting that No Deal hasn't gone away.Byronic said:I was right. Brexit is dropping down the agenda. I was ridiculed for this notion, mainly by ultra Remainers, but it’s happening. No one cares. Everyone is bored. Let the geeks sort it out
After we actually leave on Jan 31 it will vanish entirely as a first order issue
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7830177/Brussels-hints-demand-Brexit-EXTENSION-agree-UK-trade-deal-leaves-EU.html
There will be a bare bones deal on goods. Just enough. It will be sellotape and glue. And the city will get temporary rights as the eu panics about access to liquidity
They expected us to blink and revote, Just like every other country. We didn’t. It’s a different game now, and over time a reasonable deal will be done.0 -
Are you seriously still clinging onto the “we hold all the cards” nonsense?Byronic said:
Lol. You think the EU will allow a No Deal. They’re already talking about the EU asking for a transition even if we don’t want oneTheScreamingEagles said:
Bless, you're forgetting that No Deal hasn't gone away.Byronic said:I was right. Brexit is dropping down the agenda. I was ridiculed for this notion, mainly by ultra Remainers, but it’s happening. No one cares. Everyone is bored. Let the geeks sort it out
After we actually leave on Jan 31 it will vanish entirely as a first order issue
There will be a bare bones deal on goods. Just enough. It will be sellotape and glue. And the city will get temporary rights as the eu panics about access to liquidity
They expected us to blink and revote, Just like every other country. We didn’t. It’s a different game now, and over time a reasonable deal will be done.
Do you seriously think that the everyday person won’t notice any negatives between what we have now and a “bare bones trade deal on goods”?0 -
It is supposed to be law. @Gallowgate must have wandered into the wrong lecture by mistake. Which is geography.Pulpstar said:
Err ? This is accounting not calculus !DecrepiterJohnL said:
No idea. Intuitively it sounds like a curve and they are asking about inflection points.-1
