Categories
Options
Betting on a LAB majority reaches a new high – politicalbetting.com
Betting on a LAB majority reaches a new high – politicalbetting.com
I have said this before but I think this betting market offers very good value for those wanting to risk their cash on LAB not getting an overall majority. The way the market is defined Starmer’s party would need to win 326 seats which is exactly 122 more than they got at the last general election.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Westminster voting intention:
LAB: 46% (+3)
CON: 28% (-3)
LDEM: 11% (+1)
REF: 4% (-1)
GRN: 4% (+1)
via @Savanta_UK
That's also a reason I think Savanta are closer to reality. Lower Green and Ref scores than some others. I still think Ref is probably overstated even at 4%.
Scotland is likely to give Labour between 20-30 seats compared to the last election.
The red wall will return to Labour
Those 2 items between them make 100 gains likely. Add a few other seats trendy labour and they will be over 326...
1 Thou shalt be cognisant of the rate of return that is free of risk.
2 Thou shalt be cognisant of the risk of thy Chosen Bond.
3 The heretic and the infidel who hide investment that is unwise are legion. And are Naughty in My Sight.
4 Therefore thy due diligence must be keener than the sight of the eagle.
That would, of course, be the sensible, empathetic and sophisticated course of action.
However, it would require some historical knowledge and understanding; undermine the grievance industry, far left Twittermobs and go against the apparently insatiable modern urge to label people as "good" or "bad", so there's about as much chance of it happening at the moment as there is of getting sensible, pro-growth economic policies in this country.
I.e. none.
So even if the overall swing in the byelections is dire for the Tories, if they hang on to Selby or even - if HYUFD is to believed - the seethingly anti-ULEZ Hindu dominated Tory stronghold of Uxbridge, they potentially get the better of the narrative.
It also helps them that most contests are against Labour not the byelection specialist Lib Dems.
This is my day job.
You’ll trigger all sorts of red flags on your account which is likely to lead to account closures and CIFAS markers which last for six years.
Only terrorists, criminals/drug dealers use cash at that amount according to systems.
It is an AML issue as well.
The Green vote is not a tactical one. It's disgruntled Labour lefties plus none of the above voters. A large chunk of it will return to Labour come the election but a large chunk of 4% isn't that much.
If I google uk bank maximum cash deposit it autocompletes after uk bank max, never a good sign, and that throws up the FCA saying "Deposit limits: banks to reduce cash deposit limits, subject to their customer arrangements, to below the existing £20,000 per transaction." Not clear whether this reduction has happened, nor to what.
I am also, the more I think about, the more suspicious about the "old school gentleman" shtick. He could be getting 4 or 5% on that money in two fscs guaranteed accounts. In my experience farmers (if that is what he is) are astute businessmen and early adopters of technology. I bet his suppliers don't take cash and his DEFRA payments come electronically, or not at all.
They thought they had caught a big drug dealer. They had, in fact, caught a cash in hand builder taking his money home. Apparently they take pounds sterling, and use change offices in their own country to change it, a few thousand at a time.
Working in Canary Wharf, one interesting comedy was the Friday bank run. A chap would go to the bank to withdraw the cash to pay his builders. Often he would get a couple of the ‘roid ‘n weights* types from the trading floor to go with him as DIY security.
A relative in the building trade suggested to a senior civil servant that if you marched large bank withdrawals to people with planning permission and on-site builders, fun might ensue. The answer (this was under Blair, IIRC) was that this was an appalling idea since it would catch too many of the wrong people.
*a curious subset of trading culture. You see them doing arm curls while on the phone etc…
The current last few months trend is not the Con's friend, and there would have to be massive campaign swingback to prevent a Lab Majority. I wouldn't lay it at current prices.
This way if it raises any flags then it’s on the buyer and his solicitor so your bank doesn’t need to be involved and you don’t get tarred if anything amiss or suspicious.
If the buyer’s solicitor won’t accept it, or the buyer won’t do this, then that raises enough flags that you definitely shouldn’t.
However while Tory losses will likely ensure even a hung parliament in England I would not be sure of a Labour majority in England. Not least as some of those Tory losses in England will be to the LDs not Labour
Is there a contract and what does it say?
The GE will be much tighter than current opinion polls are showing, and I don't think Labour will get over the line.
I'll be delighted if I am wrong.
Do not go there, even with the proper paperwork, you will be tied up for months, and likely have the cash rejected by banks etc anyway.
On the subject of Reform, in the guise of the Brexit Party they got 2% in 2019 even though they stood down to help the Conservatives in Conservative-held seats. They averaged about 4% in the seats they did contest. Those remaining seats still mattered in terms of the need for a Conservative majority to deliver Brexit and so the Brexit Party still suffered from a tactical squeeze. The Conservatives were also genuinely popular amongst Brexit supporters. None of those factors will apply in 2024 and Reform's intention is to contest every seat if they can. I think Reform will easily achieve 4%.
https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/contact-or-visit-us/helplines/practice-advice-service/q-and-as/can-i-accept-my-clients-20000-cash-deposit#:~:text=Cash in itself is legal,to support any statement provided.
Solicitors choose not to accept cash because its hassle is probably more accurate.
If your friend is kosher and just happens to have £150K in cash hanging around and isn't a villain and really wants to pay you in cash, get him to pay you in gold coins. This'll cover it.
https://www.royalmint.com/invest/bullion/bullion-coins/gold-coins/britannia-2023-1-oz-gold-one-hundred-bullion-coin-box-king-charles-iii/
Then whenever you are short of cash, take it to a gold coin dealer and convert it to cash. Or you can take it to Switzerland (can we still do this post-Brexit?) and convert the cash to a bank account.
I suspect that the value bets will be like Scotland in 2015 on constituencies that seemed rock solid, when the constituency markets open.
With Tamworth now looking like a byelection, and formerly a safe seat, and 4 byelections in a fortnight, we may well see some confirmation soon.
So he could buy the Tritium from Russian gangsters and sell it to MI6 or the CIA.
I’m sure that a cheque from MI6 would be cashed at Coutts, no problems….
https://mermaidsuk.org.uk/news/statement-on-the-ruling-in-mermaids-v-charity-commission-and-lgb-alliance/
So, whilst many will crow that this is a good thing for LGBA, I would suggest that what it really means is in the case someone who has standing can bring this to trial again, or if on an appeal Mermaids are found to have standing, there seems to be enough of an argument for it to go either way.
Left: Chris Pincher found guilty of abuse of power after groping claims
Right: Boris Johnson starts snoring when asked why he ignored allegations against Chris Pincher
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2023/jul/06/keir-starmer-class-ceiling-labour-debating-conservatives-chris-pincher-uk-politics-latest
What's intriguing about this is that the sitting Walsall North MP has already jumped ship and has been selected to contest Tamworth for the Conservatives at the next general election. But he won't be able to stand in the by-election unless he resigns as MP for Walsall North first. No doubt he'll hang on for now in Walsall and be rooting for a Labour win in the by-election against a different Conservative candidate.