trump to Europe: "Give US Greenland or I will make Americans pay more for your goods".
He still seems to think we pay the tariffs rather than the importer.
FTSE100 company and exporter of goods manufactured in Britain to the US, Games Workshop, has absorbed 100% of the cost of tariffs charged on their exports to the US. That represents 2% off their profit margin, averaged over their global sales.
That's less profit returned to investors in dividends, less tax paid to the Exchequer.
The same is true for lots of companies selling goods to the US.
It will depend on the inco terms. Unless DDP then importer pays all duties and tariffs. Most trades to US or out of US, for goods (not services) aren’t DDP.
A commercial decision to reduce prices to offset the tariffs still means the tariff gets paid by the importer (caveat above)
There is also the currency difference to be considered.
Games Workshop stock price is up by over 40% last 12 months. They have had a record year. Warhammer seems popular. If they grow their volume then they can easily make up any lost profit.
GW are opening a Warhammer World in the US in 2027 and already have some of their production over there for the US market. Their exposure to tariffs will be very limited.
They shut down their US production ages ago.
Wargames Atlantic are going to the trouble of shipping moulds back and forth across the Atlantic to do manufacturing on both sides, which I thought was a mad thing no-one would ever do, so perhaps GW will consider it in the future, but they aren't doing it now.
Why ship moulds back and forth ? Why not just make some new ones for local production or if they have multiple sets just transfer some ?
They cannot be their only set. What if they went astray. They’d be screwed.
Also, depending on the size of the moulds, the cost of shipping will be expensive too.
It's getting cheaper to make the moulds but until recently they cost six figures to make each one. GW would spend £7m each year on new moulds and they have a back catalogue going back a couple of decades still in production - so that's more than £100m to duplicate the moulds for a separate production facility in the US.
They have moulds for a couple of thousand different sets of models, though counting them is a bit complicated.
trump to Europe: "Give US Greenland or I will make Americans pay more for your goods".
He still seems to think we pay the tariffs rather than the importer.
FTSE100 company and exporter of goods manufactured in Britain to the US, Games Workshop, has absorbed 100% of the cost of tariffs charged on their exports to the US. That represents 2% off their profit margin, averaged over their global sales.
That's less profit returned to investors in dividends, less tax paid to the Exchequer.
The same is true for lots of companies selling goods to the US.
It will depend on the inco terms. Unless DDP then importer pays all duties and tariffs. Most trades to US or out of US, for goods (not services) aren’t DDP.
A commercial decision to reduce prices to offset the tariffs still means the tariff gets paid by the importer (caveat above)
There is also the currency difference to be considered.
Games Workshop stock price is up by over 40% last 12 months. They have had a record year. Warhammer seems popular. If they grow their volume then they can easily make up any lost profit.
GW are opening a Warhammer World in the US in 2027 and already have some of their production over there for the US market. Their exposure to tariffs will be very limited.
They shut down their US production ages ago.
Wargames Atlantic are going to the trouble of shipping moulds back and forth across the Atlantic to do manufacturing on both sides, which I thought was a mad thing no-one would ever do, so perhaps GW will consider it in the future, but they aren't doing it now.
Why ship moulds back and forth ? Why not just make some new ones for local production or if they have multiple sets just transfer some ?
They cannot be their only set. What if they went astray. They’d be screwed.
Also, depending on the size of the moulds, the cost of shipping will be expensive too.
It’s thin margins and moulds/tools representing £10ks of investment, not to mention the skills required to use them properly. Less of an issue if you’re GW, but if you’re GW you can just ship there.
It’s WarGames Atlantic doing it.
Well if they ship back and forth clearly both sides have the skill to not only use them but service and maintain them. They won’t just ship from factory A to factory B and run perfectly. They will have been packed for transport so will need stripping and reassembling.
If they are the only set then it’s a massive risk if they go astray. Still I guess they must do risk mitigation on these things and deemed it not an issue.
The investment in the tooling can be depreciated over the life of the product, several years. Paid upfront from the tooling budget but depreciated over several years.
It seems mad to me like you say - why take the risk of shipping the mould across? I don't know how it makes financial sense compared to eating the tariff.
But it would be likely a lot more expensive to make duplicate moulds for both sides of the Atlantic.
trump to Europe: "Give US Greenland or I will make Americans pay more for your goods".
He still seems to think we pay the tariffs rather than the importer.
FTSE100 company and exporter of goods manufactured in Britain to the US, Games Workshop, has absorbed 100% of the cost of tariffs charged on their exports to the US. That represents 2% off their profit margin, averaged over their global sales.
That's less profit returned to investors in dividends, less tax paid to the Exchequer.
The same is true for lots of companies selling goods to the US.
It will depend on the inco terms. Unless DDP then importer pays all duties and tariffs. Most trades to US or out of US, for goods (not services) aren’t DDP.
A commercial decision to reduce prices to offset the tariffs still means the tariff gets paid by the importer (caveat above)
There is also the currency difference to be considered.
Games Workshop stock price is up by over 40% last 12 months. They have had a record year. Warhammer seems popular. If they grow their volume then they can easily make up any lost profit.
GW are opening a Warhammer World in the US in 2027 and already have some of their production over there for the US market. Their exposure to tariffs will be very limited.
They shut down their US production ages ago.
Wargames Atlantic are going to the trouble of shipping moulds back and forth across the Atlantic to do manufacturing on both sides, which I thought was a mad thing no-one would ever do, so perhaps GW will consider it in the future, but they aren't doing it now.
Why ship moulds back and forth ? Why not just make some new ones for local production or if they have multiple sets just transfer some ?
They cannot be their only set. What if they went astray. They’d be screwed.
Also, depending on the size of the moulds, the cost of shipping will be expensive too.
It’s thin margins and moulds/tools representing £10ks of investment, not to mention the skills required to use them properly. Less of an issue if you’re GW, but if you’re GW you can just ship there.
It’s WarGames Atlantic doing it.
Well if they ship back and forth clearly both sides have the skill to not only use them but service and maintain them. They won’t just ship from factory A to factory B and run perfectly. They will have been packed for transport so will need stripping and reassembling.
If they are the only set then it’s a massive risk if they go astray. Still I guess they must do risk mitigation on these things and deemed it not an issue.
The investment in the tooling can be depreciated over the life of the product, several years. Paid upfront from the tooling budget but depreciated over several years.
Its a shame they moved away from spin moulding in metal. That is easy. You just spin up a set of masters and send them across the pond. Making up new production moulds is simple and cheap. Still the way the majority of figure manufacturers work (including me). I must admit I don't like plastics or the sorts of resins that Warlord make. Definitely metals for me still.
What sort of cycle time would that be ? I’d guess it ideal for low volume batch production,
I’ve never come across spin moulding in my career only in my ONC/HNC/HND years. I’ve sourced metal spun products but that’s different.
Certainly with these figures they feel different in metal. A little bit more robust and substantive. But I guess plastic moulding has the advantage of being quick as a process for larger volume runs and less labour intensive.
trump to Europe: "Give US Greenland or I will make Americans pay more for your goods".
He still seems to think we pay the tariffs rather than the importer.
FTSE100 company and exporter of goods manufactured in Britain to the US, Games Workshop, has absorbed 100% of the cost of tariffs charged on their exports to the US. That represents 2% off their profit margin, averaged over their global sales.
That's less profit returned to investors in dividends, less tax paid to the Exchequer.
The same is true for lots of companies selling goods to the US.
It will depend on the inco terms. Unless DDP then importer pays all duties and tariffs. Most trades to US or out of US, for goods (not services) aren’t DDP.
A commercial decision to reduce prices to offset the tariffs still means the tariff gets paid by the importer (caveat above)
There is also the currency difference to be considered.
Games Workshop stock price is up by over 40% last 12 months. They have had a record year. Warhammer seems popular. If they grow their volume then they can easily make up any lost profit.
GW are opening a Warhammer World in the US in 2027 and already have some of their production over there for the US market. Their exposure to tariffs will be very limited.
They shut down their US production ages ago.
Wargames Atlantic are going to the trouble of shipping moulds back and forth across the Atlantic to do manufacturing on both sides, which I thought was a mad thing no-one would ever do, so perhaps GW will consider it in the future, but they aren't doing it now.
I understand they are looking at reopening it. And as I say they are planning on opening a Warhammer World in the US in 2027.
Where did you hear they are looking at that? They certainly aren't telling their investors about it.
Warhammer World will be just an events space. Doesn't mean anything in manufacturing terms.
trump to Europe: "Give US Greenland or I will make Americans pay more for your goods".
He still seems to think we pay the tariffs rather than the importer.
FTSE100 company and exporter of goods manufactured in Britain to the US, Games Workshop, has absorbed 100% of the cost of tariffs charged on their exports to the US. That represents 2% off their profit margin, averaged over their global sales.
That's less profit returned to investors in dividends, less tax paid to the Exchequer.
The same is true for lots of companies selling goods to the US.
It will depend on the inco terms. Unless DDP then importer pays all duties and tariffs. Most trades to US or out of US, for goods (not services) aren’t DDP.
A commercial decision to reduce prices to offset the tariffs still means the tariff gets paid by the importer (caveat above)
There is also the currency difference to be considered.
Games Workshop stock price is up by over 40% last 12 months. They have had a record year. Warhammer seems popular. If they grow their volume then they can easily make up any lost profit.
GW are opening a Warhammer World in the US in 2027 and already have some of their production over there for the US market. Their exposure to tariffs will be very limited.
They shut down their US production ages ago.
Wargames Atlantic are going to the trouble of shipping moulds back and forth across the Atlantic to do manufacturing on both sides, which I thought was a mad thing no-one would ever do, so perhaps GW will consider it in the future, but they aren't doing it now.
Why ship moulds back and forth ? Why not just make some new ones for local production or if they have multiple sets just transfer some ?
They cannot be their only set. What if they went astray. They’d be screwed.
Also, depending on the size of the moulds, the cost of shipping will be expensive too.
It’s thin margins and moulds/tools representing £10ks of investment, not to mention the skills required to use them properly. Less of an issue if you’re GW, but if you’re GW you can just ship there.
It’s WarGames Atlantic doing it.
Well if they ship back and forth clearly both sides have the skill to not only use them but service and maintain them. They won’t just ship from factory A to factory B and run perfectly. They will have been packed for transport so will need stripping and reassembling.
If they are the only set then it’s a massive risk if they go astray. Still I guess they must do risk mitigation on these things and deemed it not an issue.
The investment in the tooling can be depreciated over the life of the product, several years. Paid upfront from the tooling budget but depreciated over several years.
Its a shame they moved away from spin moulding in metal. That is easy. You just spin up a set of masters and send them across the pond. Making up new production moulds is simple and cheap. Still the way the majority of figure manufacturers work (including me). I must admit I don't like plastics or the sorts of resins that Warlord make. Definitely metals for me still.
I've found it's much easier to combine pieces from different models, chop them up and reassemble them in my own unique creations with plastic rather than metal, so I almost completely stick to plastic models these days - but I do like the metal models I already have a lot.
trump to Europe: "Give US Greenland or I will make Americans pay more for your goods".
He still seems to think we pay the tariffs rather than the importer.
FTSE100 company and exporter of goods manufactured in Britain to the US, Games Workshop, has absorbed 100% of the cost of tariffs charged on their exports to the US. That represents 2% off their profit margin, averaged over their global sales.
That's less profit returned to investors in dividends, less tax paid to the Exchequer.
The same is true for lots of companies selling goods to the US.
It will depend on the inco terms. Unless DDP then importer pays all duties and tariffs. Most trades to US or out of US, for goods (not services) aren’t DDP.
A commercial decision to reduce prices to offset the tariffs still means the tariff gets paid by the importer (caveat above)
There is also the currency difference to be considered.
Games Workshop stock price is up by over 40% last 12 months. They have had a record year. Warhammer seems popular. If they grow their volume then they can easily make up any lost profit.
GW are opening a Warhammer World in the US in 2027 and already have some of their production over there for the US market. Their exposure to tariffs will be very limited.
They shut down their US production ages ago.
Wargames Atlantic are going to the trouble of shipping moulds back and forth across the Atlantic to do manufacturing on both sides, which I thought was a mad thing no-one would ever do, so perhaps GW will consider it in the future, but they aren't doing it now.
Why ship moulds back and forth ? Why not just make some new ones for local production or if they have multiple sets just transfer some ?
They cannot be their only set. What if they went astray. They’d be screwed.
Also, depending on the size of the moulds, the cost of shipping will be expensive too.
It's getting cheaper to make the moulds but until recently they cost six figures to make each one. GW would spend £7m each year on new moulds and they have a back catalogue going back a couple of decades still in production - so that's more than £100m to duplicate the moulds for a separate production facility in the US.
They have moulds for a couple of thousand different sets of models, though counting them is a bit complicated.
Storing them and ensuring they are maintained too, from my experience.
Surely they would only make duplicate tools for high running volume and as the tools had already been designed once the cost of making a second set would be less expensive than the first and they wouldn’t need to make them all, just the high runners.
Also when they make new tools they could look to refurbish the old tools and transfer them. That’s what I did on a recent project where I sourced some new tools as the old were reaching end of life and we had a budget.
A six figure sum to make a mould. I’ve sourced plenty of injection mould tools in my time. That’s the sort of cost I’d pay for complex interior trim that’s a substantial size with quite a few moving parts and a hot runner. What is involved ?
Tooling really got less expensive in a few phases when it moved from the U.K. to Spain/Portugal then to Eastern Europe and then to the Far East.
I actually think Greenlandschluss will be popular with DJT's base because it's owning the libs/EU, getting them out of NATO and Makes America Great Again.
Plenty of people in the UK would get behind a similar project if we had the military and economic might to do it.
Buying Greenland is popular with Republicans as the poll I showed earlier said (but not invading it), US voters overall though are opposed once Democrats and Independents are included
Realistically speaking any US invasion of Greenland is going to be over as soon as anyone hears that it is happening, and so there's going to be nothing for US voters to oppose.
Once the deed has been done I don't see many Republican voters being in favour of withdrawing with their tail between their legs.
You would also have to occupy it and plenty of Greenlanders would be willing to form an armed resistance, perhaps even with arms supplied by the Danes and then the US bodybags would start.
Democrats and Independents and therefore most Americans would be opposed anyway and there would certainly be enough Republicans in Congress willing to break lines to join them and impeach Trump and maybe even convict
Armed resistance? The population of Greenland is about that of a small British town, roughly that of Canterbury (just the settlement proper, not even the wider district) so we’re not taking a huge number of potential Maquisards.
So? It is a vast land to hide out in and take potshots at invading troops, blow up their infrastructure etc and then melt back into the icy tundra and igloos
You can't really hide out in most of Greenland. It's a vast ice sheet 3km tall. It would be a bit like trying to fight a guerilla war on the surface of Mars.
Trump can take it at will whenever he wants as resistance would be futile
Never mind, John Swinney expects a majority SNP Holyrood in May and will demand a referendum on independence
@HYUFD will have all his time taken up on his tank invasion of Scotland from Epping !!!!
You are pathetic some times BigG, rant about Trump and would then let him walk all over you when it actually comes to it.
If he did invade it before he was impeached and convicted by Congress Greenlanders would of course fight the invasion and he would also be at war with Denmark as it is Danish land.
Swinney can expect what he wants, the UK government will refuse an indyref2 and he can do sod all about it legally as the UKSC affirmed (not that many polls give an SNP majority anyway)
You have no idea what you are talking about re Greenland
It is 9 times the size of the UK with the main population in Nuuk and yes I have been there
If Trumps wants it no military action will stop him and your idea the Greenlanders would be a Dads Army is ludicous
Trump not only has to take it and he would immediately be at war with Denmark if he tried, maybe the rest of Nato too, he then has to occupy it with a hostile population who would go out of their way to destroy US infrastructure and kill US troops given the chance.
Plus he would likely be facing impeachment by Congress at home
And meanwhile US bases across Europe are put in a rather vulnerable position.
Shut Menwith Hill and Lakenheath tomorrow. They'll need Mildenhall to evacuate every other base in Europe. Frankly, even as a long run Atlanticist... fuck em.
trump to Europe: "Give US Greenland or I will make Americans pay more for your goods".
He still seems to think we pay the tariffs rather than the importer.
FTSE100 company and exporter of goods manufactured in Britain to the US, Games Workshop, has absorbed 100% of the cost of tariffs charged on their exports to the US. That represents 2% off their profit margin, averaged over their global sales.
That's less profit returned to investors in dividends, less tax paid to the Exchequer.
The same is true for lots of companies selling goods to the US.
It will depend on the inco terms. Unless DDP then importer pays all duties and tariffs. Most trades to US or out of US, for goods (not services) aren’t DDP.
A commercial decision to reduce prices to offset the tariffs still means the tariff gets paid by the importer (caveat above)
There is also the currency difference to be considered.
Games Workshop stock price is up by over 40% last 12 months. They have had a record year. Warhammer seems popular. If they grow their volume then they can easily make up any lost profit.
GW are opening a Warhammer World in the US in 2027 and already have some of their production over there for the US market. Their exposure to tariffs will be very limited.
They shut down their US production ages ago.
Wargames Atlantic are going to the trouble of shipping moulds back and forth across the Atlantic to do manufacturing on both sides, which I thought was a mad thing no-one would ever do, so perhaps GW will consider it in the future, but they aren't doing it now.
Why ship moulds back and forth ? Why not just make some new ones for local production or if they have multiple sets just transfer some ?
They cannot be their only set. What if they went astray. They’d be screwed.
Also, depending on the size of the moulds, the cost of shipping will be expensive too.
It’s thin margins and moulds/tools representing £10ks of investment, not to mention the skills required to use them properly. Less of an issue if you’re GW, but if you’re GW you can just ship there.
It’s WarGames Atlantic doing it.
Well if they ship back and forth clearly both sides have the skill to not only use them but service and maintain them. They won’t just ship from factory A to factory B and run perfectly. They will have been packed for transport so will need stripping and reassembling.
If they are the only set then it’s a massive risk if they go astray. Still I guess they must do risk mitigation on these things and deemed it not an issue.
The investment in the tooling can be depreciated over the life of the product, several years. Paid upfront from the tooling budget but depreciated over several years.
Its a shame they moved away from spin moulding in metal. That is easy. You just spin up a set of masters and send them across the pond. Making up new production moulds is simple and cheap. Still the way the majority of figure manufacturers work (including me). I must admit I don't like plastics or the sorts of resins that Warlord make. Definitely metals for me still.
What sort of cycle time would that be ? I’d guess it ideal for low volume batch production,
I’ve never come across spin moulding in my career only in my ONC/HNC/HND years. I’ve sourced metal spun products but that’s different.
Certainly with these figures they feel different in metal. A little bit more robust and substantive. But I guess plastic moulding has the advantage of being quick as a process for larger volume runs and less labour intensive.
You can spin 30 figures in an 11" vulcanised mould in about 2 minutes. It is farly labour intensive but with the exception of GW, Warlord and Atlantic, most companies including Foundry still produce metal miniatures by spin casting. I have a spin casting machine in my shed.
The problem with spin casting is that most model designers for GW work in 3-ups these days rather than to scale. The conversion to 35mm is much easier when you are injection moulding for plastic rather than metal spin moulding.
Ian Livingston, who founded Games Workshop and did the Fighting Fantasy books with Steve Jackson, used to have a pub band called the Jackson Four and used to do terrible (sorry Ian) gigs to tiny audiences in pubs in the Richmond area.
It is going to be a merciless grapple for supremacy on the right. That is the conclusion I draw from the outpourings of bitterness and bile triggered by the rattery of Robert Jenrick.
“He’s the ultimate careerist and saw his chances of succeeding Badenoch slipping away,” remarks one senior Tory, offering the most widely accepted explanation for his defection. “I’ve put aside my personal ambition,” is the most risibly untrue thing he said last Thursday.
Both his old party and his new one believe they have gained from these events. Mr Farage is calculating that accepting Tories who served in the last government is a price worth paying to compensate for Reform’s glaring lack of ministerial experience, even if their track record is one which he routinely lambasts as a litany of lies and incompetence. Mrs Badenoch’s generally admired handling of the episode has added a dab of lustre to her leadership.
Reform, 10 points ahead of the Tories, reckons it is still in the box seat and expects its claim to be the principal party of opposition to be vindicated with handsome gains in the May elections. Neither the blue corner nor the turquoise one think they have any incentive to parley. “Never!” spits one senior Tory MP. “They’re out to destroy us.” There’s no deal to be done when the fear and loathing is so pronounced. Forget any notions of “uniting the right”. It is going to be mortal combat.
It is going to be a merciless grapple for supremacy on the right. That is the conclusion I draw from the outpourings of bitterness and bile triggered by the rattery of Robert Jenrick.
“He’s the ultimate careerist and saw his chances of succeeding Badenoch slipping away,” remarks one senior Tory, offering the most widely accepted explanation for his defection. “I’ve put aside my personal ambition,” is the most risibly untrue thing he said last Thursday.
Both his old party and his new one believe they have gained from these events. Mr Farage is calculating that accepting Tories who served in the last government is a price worth paying to compensate for Reform’s glaring lack of ministerial experience, even if their track record is one which he routinely lambasts as a litany of lies and incompetence. Mrs Badenoch’s generally admired handling of the episode has added a dab of lustre to her leadership.
Reform, 10 points ahead of the Tories, reckons it is still in the box seat and expects its claim to be the principal party of opposition to be vindicated with handsome gains in the May elections. Neither the blue corner nor the turquoise one think they have any incentive to parley. “Never!” spits one senior Tory MP. “They’re out to destroy us.” There’s no deal to be done when the fear and loathing is so pronounced. Forget any notions of “uniting the right”. It is going to be mortal combat.
Is the unnamed senior Tory right though? Was it that Jenrick saw his chance of succeeding Kemi slipping away? On Friday morning Jenrick was around 6/4 to be next Conservative leader; any price the rest. Kemi's own stock had risen slightly but Jenrick remained the strong favourite.
Surely the significance is that he saw the Conservatives' chance at the next election slipping away so his route back to power is via Reform and to Number 10 through replacing Nigel Farage.
It is going to be a merciless grapple for supremacy on the right. That is the conclusion I draw from the outpourings of bitterness and bile triggered by the rattery of Robert Jenrick.
“He’s the ultimate careerist and saw his chances of succeeding Badenoch slipping away,” remarks one senior Tory, offering the most widely accepted explanation for his defection. “I’ve put aside my personal ambition,” is the most risibly untrue thing he said last Thursday.
Both his old party and his new one believe they have gained from these events. Mr Farage is calculating that accepting Tories who served in the last government is a price worth paying to compensate for Reform’s glaring lack of ministerial experience, even if their track record is one which he routinely lambasts as a litany of lies and incompetence. Mrs Badenoch’s generally admired handling of the episode has added a dab of lustre to her leadership.
Reform, 10 points ahead of the Tories, reckons it is still in the box seat and expects its claim to be the principal party of opposition to be vindicated with handsome gains in the May elections. Neither the blue corner nor the turquoise one think they have any incentive to parley. “Never!” spits one senior Tory MP. “They’re out to destroy us.” There’s no deal to be done when the fear and loathing is so pronounced. Forget any notions of “uniting the right”. It is going to be mortal combat.
Is the unnamed senior Tory right though? Was it that Jenrick saw his chance of succeeding Kemi slipping away? On Friday morning Jenrick was around 6/4 to be next Conservative leader; any price the rest. Kemi's own stock had risen slightly but Jenrick remained the strong favourite.
Surely the significance is that he saw the Conservatives' chance at the next election slipping away so his route back to power is via Reform and to Number 10 through replacing Nigel Farage.
Same difference, if the point is personal ambition, surely?
It is going to be a merciless grapple for supremacy on the right. That is the conclusion I draw from the outpourings of bitterness and bile triggered by the rattery of Robert Jenrick.
“He’s the ultimate careerist and saw his chances of succeeding Badenoch slipping away,” remarks one senior Tory, offering the most widely accepted explanation for his defection. “I’ve put aside my personal ambition,” is the most risibly untrue thing he said last Thursday.
Both his old party and his new one believe they have gained from these events. Mr Farage is calculating that accepting Tories who served in the last government is a price worth paying to compensate for Reform’s glaring lack of ministerial experience, even if their track record is one which he routinely lambasts as a litany of lies and incompetence. Mrs Badenoch’s generally admired handling of the episode has added a dab of lustre to her leadership.
Reform, 10 points ahead of the Tories, reckons it is still in the box seat and expects its claim to be the principal party of opposition to be vindicated with handsome gains in the May elections. Neither the blue corner nor the turquoise one think they have any incentive to parley. “Never!” spits one senior Tory MP. “They’re out to destroy us.” There’s no deal to be done when the fear and loathing is so pronounced. Forget any notions of “uniting the right”. It is going to be mortal combat.
Is the unnamed senior Tory right though? Was it that Jenrick saw his chance of succeeding Kemi slipping away? On Friday morning Jenrick was around 6/4 to be next Conservative leader; any price the rest. Kemi's own stock had risen slightly but Jenrick remained the strong favourite.
Surely the significance is that he saw the Conservatives' chance at the next election slipping away so his route back to power is via Reform and to Number 10 through replacing Nigel Farage.
Same difference, if the point is personal ambition, surely?
The point is he sees Reform winning the election and not the Conservatives.
It is going to be a merciless grapple for supremacy on the right. That is the conclusion I draw from the outpourings of bitterness and bile triggered by the rattery of Robert Jenrick.
“He’s the ultimate careerist and saw his chances of succeeding Badenoch slipping away,” remarks one senior Tory, offering the most widely accepted explanation for his defection. “I’ve put aside my personal ambition,” is the most risibly untrue thing he said last Thursday.
Both his old party and his new one believe they have gained from these events. Mr Farage is calculating that accepting Tories who served in the last government is a price worth paying to compensate for Reform’s glaring lack of ministerial experience, even if their track record is one which he routinely lambasts as a litany of lies and incompetence. Mrs Badenoch’s generally admired handling of the episode has added a dab of lustre to her leadership.
Reform, 10 points ahead of the Tories, reckons it is still in the box seat and expects its claim to be the principal party of opposition to be vindicated with handsome gains in the May elections. Neither the blue corner nor the turquoise one think they have any incentive to parley. “Never!” spits one senior Tory MP. “They’re out to destroy us.” There’s no deal to be done when the fear and loathing is so pronounced. Forget any notions of “uniting the right”. It is going to be mortal combat.
Is the unnamed senior Tory right though? Was it that Jenrick saw his chance of succeeding Kemi slipping away? On Friday morning Jenrick was around 6/4 to be next Conservative leader; any price the rest. Kemi's own stock had risen slightly but Jenrick remained the strong favourite.
Surely the significance is that he saw the Conservatives' chance at the next election slipping away so his route back to power is via Reform and to Number 10 through replacing Nigel Farage.
Same difference, if the point is personal ambition, surely?
The point is he sees Reform winning the election and not the Conservatives.
Yes, but the point made in the article is that the defection arose solely from J’s personal ambition and assessment of his career path, completely contrary to the story of selfless sacrifice for principle that he tried to paint in his speech.
It is going to be a merciless grapple for supremacy on the right. That is the conclusion I draw from the outpourings of bitterness and bile triggered by the rattery of Robert Jenrick.
“He’s the ultimate careerist and saw his chances of succeeding Badenoch slipping away,” remarks one senior Tory, offering the most widely accepted explanation for his defection. “I’ve put aside my personal ambition,” is the most risibly untrue thing he said last Thursday.
Both his old party and his new one believe they have gained from these events. Mr Farage is calculating that accepting Tories who served in the last government is a price worth paying to compensate for Reform’s glaring lack of ministerial experience, even if their track record is one which he routinely lambasts as a litany of lies and incompetence. Mrs Badenoch’s generally admired handling of the episode has added a dab of lustre to her leadership.
Reform, 10 points ahead of the Tories, reckons it is still in the box seat and expects its claim to be the principal party of opposition to be vindicated with handsome gains in the May elections. Neither the blue corner nor the turquoise one think they have any incentive to parley. “Never!” spits one senior Tory MP. “They’re out to destroy us.” There’s no deal to be done when the fear and loathing is so pronounced. Forget any notions of “uniting the right”. It is going to be mortal combat.
Is the unnamed senior Tory right though? Was it that Jenrick saw his chance of succeeding Kemi slipping away? On Friday morning Jenrick was around 6/4 to be next Conservative leader; any price the rest. Kemi's own stock had risen slightly but Jenrick remained the strong favourite.
Surely the significance is that he saw the Conservatives' chance at the next election slipping away so his route back to power is via Reform and to Number 10 through replacing Nigel Farage.
Same difference, if the point is personal ambition, surely?
The point is he sees Reform winning the election and not the Conservatives.
Yes, but the point made in the article is that the defection arose solely from J’s personal ambition and assessment of his career path, completely contrary to the story of selfless sacrifice for principle that he tried to paint in his speech.
Of course Jenrick is ambitious and self-serving but so are lots of politicians. Disraeli (probably) quoted Napoleon's remark that every soldier carries a field marshal's baton in his knapsack.
No, in the article the unnamed senior Tory said it was because Jenrick's chances of succeeding Kemi were slipping away. That does not seem to be true, at least insofar as the betting markets priced him as clear favourite with no-one else in the same parish.
So the point is not that Jenrick's chances of being Tory leader were disappearing (they weren't) but that being Tory leader is not the prize it once was if Reform are on course to win the election.
It is going to be a merciless grapple for supremacy on the right. That is the conclusion I draw from the outpourings of bitterness and bile triggered by the rattery of Robert Jenrick.
“He’s the ultimate careerist and saw his chances of succeeding Badenoch slipping away,” remarks one senior Tory, offering the most widely accepted explanation for his defection. “I’ve put aside my personal ambition,” is the most risibly untrue thing he said last Thursday.
Both his old party and his new one believe they have gained from these events. Mr Farage is calculating that accepting Tories who served in the last government is a price worth paying to compensate for Reform’s glaring lack of ministerial experience, even if their track record is one which he routinely lambasts as a litany of lies and incompetence. Mrs Badenoch’s generally admired handling of the episode has added a dab of lustre to her leadership.
Reform, 10 points ahead of the Tories, reckons it is still in the box seat and expects its claim to be the principal party of opposition to be vindicated with handsome gains in the May elections. Neither the blue corner nor the turquoise one think they have any incentive to parley. “Never!” spits one senior Tory MP. “They’re out to destroy us.” There’s no deal to be done when the fear and loathing is so pronounced. Forget any notions of “uniting the right”. It is going to be mortal combat.
Is the unnamed senior Tory right though? Was it that Jenrick saw his chance of succeeding Kemi slipping away? On Friday morning Jenrick was around 6/4 to be next Conservative leader; any price the rest. Kemi's own stock had risen slightly but Jenrick remained the strong favourite.
Surely the significance is that he saw the Conservatives' chance at the next election slipping away so his route back to power is via Reform and to Number 10 through replacing Nigel Farage.
Same difference, if the point is personal ambition, surely?
The point is he sees Reform winning the election and not the Conservatives.
Yes, but the point made in the article is that the defection arose solely from J’s personal ambition and assessment of his career path, completely contrary to the story of selfless sacrifice for principle that he tried to paint in his speech.
Of course Jenrick is ambitious and self-serving but so are lots of politicians. Disraeli (probably) quoted Napoleon's remark that every soldier carries a field marshal's baton in his knapsack.
No, in the article the unnamed senior Tory said it was because Jenrick's chances of succeeding Kemi were slipping away. That does not seem to be true, at least insofar as the betting markets priced him as clear favourite with no-one else in the same parish.
So the point is not that Jenrick's chances of being Tory leader were disappearing (they weren't) but that being Tory leader is not the prize it once was if Reform are on course to win the election.
Who was the last betting favourite to become Conservative leader? I would suggest (although I doubt if betting was a thing then) that it was Anthony Eden in April 1955.
Johnson might be an exception, also sort of Rishi Sunak (at the second go).
Just read the thread header. Why sack Wes Streeting when he's effective in his post? Get rid of such comparisons!
Good morning, everyone.
Latest on that is in today's Sunday Times.
An unnamed Number Ten Source blaming Darren Jones. Who is currently Chief Secretary to the PM.
Call me a grumpy, middle-aged cynic, but who in Number Ten might want to clip the wings of the Chief Secretary to the PM?
Morg... sorry, More on this as we get it.
The Chief Secretary to the PM has direct access to the PM, he doesn't need to use a paper to get his point across..
Streeting is an effective minister, is the desire within the Civil service to remove all effective ministers so they can screw things up more efficiently.
trump to Europe: "Give US Greenland or I will make Americans pay more for your goods".
He still seems to think we pay the tariffs rather than the importer.
FTSE100 company and exporter of goods manufactured in Britain to the US, Games Workshop, has absorbed 100% of the cost of tariffs charged on their exports to the US. That represents 2% off their profit margin, averaged over their global sales.
That's less profit returned to investors in dividends, less tax paid to the Exchequer.
The same is true for lots of companies selling goods to the US.
It will depend on the inco terms. Unless DDP then importer pays all duties and tariffs. Most trades to US or out of US, for goods (not services) aren’t DDP.
A commercial decision to reduce prices to offset the tariffs still means the tariff gets paid by the importer (caveat above)
There is also the currency difference to be considered.
Games Workshop stock price is up by over 40% last 12 months. They have had a record year. Warhammer seems popular. If they grow their volume then they can easily make up any lost profit.
GW are opening a Warhammer World in the US in 2027 and already have some of their production over there for the US market. Their exposure to tariffs will be very limited.
They shut down their US production ages ago.
Wargames Atlantic are going to the trouble of shipping moulds back and forth across the Atlantic to do manufacturing on both sides, which I thought was a mad thing no-one would ever do, so perhaps GW will consider it in the future, but they aren't doing it now.
Why ship moulds back and forth ? Why not just make some new ones for local production or if they have multiple sets just transfer some ?
They cannot be their only set. What if they went astray. They’d be screwed.
Also, depending on the size of the moulds, the cost of shipping will be expensive too.
It’s thin margins and moulds/tools representing £10ks of investment, not to mention the skills required to use them properly. Less of an issue if you’re GW, but if you’re GW you can just ship there.
It’s WarGames Atlantic doing it.
Well if they ship back and forth clearly both sides have the skill to not only use them but service and maintain them. They won’t just ship from factory A to factory B and run perfectly. They will have been packed for transport so will need stripping and reassembling.
If they are the only set then it’s a massive risk if they go astray. Still I guess they must do risk mitigation on these things and deemed it not an issue.
The investment in the tooling can be depreciated over the life of the product, several years. Paid upfront from the tooling budget but depreciated over several years.
Its a shame they moved away from spin moulding in metal. That is easy. You just spin up a set of masters and send them across the pond. Making up new production moulds is simple and cheap. Still the way the majority of figure manufacturers work (including me). I must admit I don't like plastics or the sorts of resins that Warlord make. Definitely metals for me still.
What sort of cycle time would that be ? I’d guess it ideal for low volume batch production,
I’ve never come across spin moulding in my career only in my ONC/HNC/HND years. I’ve sourced metal spun products but that’s different.
Certainly with these figures they feel different in metal. A little bit more robust and substantive. But I guess plastic moulding has the advantage of being quick as a process for larger volume runs and less labour intensive.
You can spin 30 figures in an 11" vulcanised mould in about 2 minutes. It is farly labour intensive but with the exception of GW, Warlord and Atlantic, most companies including Foundry still produce metal miniatures by spin casting. I have a spin casting machine in my shed.
The problem with spin casting is that most model designers for GW work in 3-ups these days rather than to scale. The conversion to 35mm is much easier when you are injection moulding for plastic rather than metal spin moulding.
I’d guess the downside is, for the larger volume producers, the tool life and cycle time.
Fascinating though.
This afternoon I’m going to look this up on YouTube. Still have a strong affection for engineering even though retired.
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
Some good opportunities for Starmer to start showing that Labour could be a Party of change and at the same time show some dynamic and popular leadership. If he cant do it now while the right are fighting like rats in a sack and with an unhinged common enemy also of the right then probably time to start looking for a new more charismatic and decisive leader.
US official says EU should consider separating Greenland tariff issue from US trade deal
WTF does that even mean?
It means that they don’t like the EU response of suspending the trade talks
Not much point in agreeing something when Trump tears it up at whim.
Ignoring that - for the EU trade is always part of a bigger agreement which is partly why we ended up where we did (Bozo and May's incompetency is another part so I'm not pinning the end result of Brexit just on the EU).
I remember, a couple of years back, someone here on PB was very insistent that the existence of alien life would be confirmed imminently. I wonder what became of that brave soul?
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
Like I said before, he simply wants the place in the history books as one of the presidents who added a chunk of land to the USA, and probably thinks it will increase his chances of being added to Mount Rushmore. I doubt he cares about the military strategy or even the deeply buried minerals, since it will be many years before he can get any $$$ from them.
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
He wants land so he can point to an 'achievement'. Territory is concrete, so a simpleton can understand that. The notion of turning allies into enemies is more intangible so it registers less with an idiot.
Some good opportunities for Starmer to start showing that Labour could be a Party of change and at the same time show some dynamic and popular leadership. If he cant do it now while the right are fighting like rats in a sack and with an unhinged common enemy also of the right then probably time to start looking for a new more charismatic and decisive leader.
Another way of looking at this is: The Tories have finally seen that their only future is to lead the right of centre in people, policy, communications and showing clear difference between Tories and Reform. They only have one right of centre party to overcome and it is full of tricksters.
Labour face a larger challenge: LD, Green, Islamists, Jezbollah, SNP, PC. And the challenge of being in government in hard times. And these are not great times for changing who is PM, which is a messy process anyway.
I remember, a couple of years back, someone here on PB was very insistent that the existence of alien life would be confirmed imminently. I wonder what became of that brave soul?
He’s being held somewhere in the vicinity of Alpha Centaurii?
I remember, a couple of years back, someone here on PB was very insistent that the existence of alien life would be confirmed imminently. I wonder what became of that brave soul?
I suspect this soul was Leon. Yours truly, here, has also been interested, but as much with cultural.biases in the way UF0 claims have been reported or framed, rather than predicting one way or the other. I also do still fiind Avi Loeb's position on 3i/Atlas interesting. His stance on scientific openness is probably the most interesting of all.
Pvt. Leon has been crying in his bunk for a day and a half because the corned beef in his rat pack was too salty. Pvt. Roberts has been sewn into his sleeping bag by other members of the platoon because he wouldn't stop talking about how a resolution to this conflict could be achieved by liberalising planning regulations in the Greater Nuuk area. Pvt. Malmesbury was captured on patrol by a chalk of US Delta Force operators, they brought him back 10 minutes later under a flag of truce. Efforts to co-ordinate with the local insurgents continue, with Pvt. HYUFD instructing them on how to make Bangalore Torpedoes from fishing rods before he was driven off by a hail of thrown fish heads.
Conditions in the FOB remain habitable despite cold temperatures outside. We are warmed by the immense amounts of IR radiation coming off Cpl. Casino's face after he was issued a rainbow lanyard.
Some good opportunities for Starmer to start showing that Labour could be a Party of change and at the same time show some dynamic and popular leadership. If he cant do it now while the right are fighting like rats in a sack and with an unhinged common enemy also of the right then probably time to start looking for a new more charismatic and decisive leader.
Another way of looking at this is: The Tories have finally seen that their only future is to lead the right of centre in people, policy, communications and showing clear difference between Tories and Reform. They only have one right of centre party to overcome and it is full of tricksters.
Labour face a larger challenge: LD, Green, Islamists, Jezbollah, SNP, PC. And the challenge of being in government in hard times. And these are not great times for changing who is PM, which is a messy process anyway.
Tory stock is rising steadily.
You may of course be correct. PB Tories are all talking a good job, but unless I am mistaken Mr Jenrick and Mr Rossindale beg to differ.
Pvt. Leon has been crying in his bunk for a day and a half because the corned beef in his rat pack was too salty. Pvt. Roberts has been sewn into his sleeping bag by other members of the platoon because he wouldn't stop talking about how a resolution to this conflict could be achieved by liberalising planning regulations in the Greater Nuuk area. Pvt. Malmesbury was captured on patrol by a chalk of US Delta Force operators, they brought him back 10 minutes later under a flag of truce. Efforts to co-ordinate with the local insurgents continue, with Pvt. HYUFD instructing them on how to make Bangalore Torpedoes from fishing rods before he was driven off by a hail of thrown fish heads.
Conditions in the FOB remain habitable despite cold temperatures outside. We are warmed by the immense amounts of IR radiation coming off Cpl. Casino's face after he was issued a rainbow lanyard.
I remember, a couple of years back, someone here on PB was very insistent that the existence of alien life would be confirmed imminently. I wonder what became of that brave soul?
Trump is holding it back in case Greenland doesn't stem the tide on Epstein revelations...
Some good opportunities for Starmer to start showing that Labour could be a Party of change and at the same time show some dynamic and popular leadership. If he cant do it now while the right are fighting like rats in a sack and with an unhinged common enemy also of the right then probably time to start looking for a new more charismatic and decisive leader.
Another way of looking at this is: The Tories have finally seen that their only future is to lead the right of centre in people, policy, communications and showing clear difference between Tories and Reform. They only have one right of centre party to overcome and it is full of tricksters.
Labour face a larger challenge: LD, Green, Islamists, Jezbollah, SNP, PC. And the challenge of being in government in hard times. And these are not great times for changing who is PM, which is a messy process anyway.
Tory stock is rising steadily.
You may of course be correct. PB Tories are all talking a good job, but unless I am mistaken Mr Jenrick and Mr Rossindale beg to differ.
You should be pleased that Kemi has slammed Gill this am
Also Jenrick is not a conservative and Rossindale has denied the rumours
Pvt. Leon has been crying in his bunk for a day and a half because the corned beef in his rat pack was too salty. Pvt. Roberts has been sewn into his sleeping bag by other members of the platoon because he wouldn't stop talking about how a resolution to this conflict could be achieved by liberalising planning regulations in the Greater Nuuk area. Pvt. Malmesbury was captured on patrol by a chalk of US Delta Force operators, they brought him back 10 minutes later under a flag of truce. Efforts to co-ordinate with the local insurgents continue, with Pvt. HYUFD instructing them on how to make Bangalore Torpedoes from fishing rods before he was driven off by a hail of thrown fish heads.
Conditions in the FOB remain habitable despite cold temperatures outside. We are warmed by the immense amounts of IR radiation coming off Cpl. Casino's face after he was issued a rainbow lanyard.
Rawnsley isn't wrong - the "existential" battle for the "right" is analogous to that fought (briefly) between Labour and the SDP for the "centre left" forty or more years ago. As I've remarked frequently on here, the Falklands didn't just secure the Thatcher Premiership - it also secured Labour's position as the only credible alternative Government.
Labour's long road back began from the wreckage of the 1983 election just as the much shorter road back (as it turned out) started from the ruins of 2019.
The truth in the 1980s was there were more votes cast for Labour and the Alliance combined than for the Conservatives but all those anti-Conservative voters allowed the monolithic Conservative vote to win seat after seat.
Now, the roles are reversed (to an extent). The anti-Labour vote is split and there are plenty of seats where both Reform and the Conservatives will be fighting Labour and it may well be the latter will prevail more often than not against a split opposition.
The week's events have also, as Rawnsley suggests, ended the Rees-Mogg dream of a "unified Right". The Conservative aim in 2029 must be to confirm their status as the credible alternative Government - IF they lose that to Reform, they face the kind of irrelevance with which the LDs are all too familiar. That means not only finishing first or second in terms of seats but ensuring Reform stay on the fringes.
Here than is what we've always known - the duopoly is symbiotic. Labour needs the Conservatives, the Conservatives need Labour. Each is meaningless without the other. Labour would love the Conservatives to finish second again, in terms of seats, to keep the balance, the pattern, the form of politics.
The election of 2029 won't therefore just be Labour vs Not Labour and/or Reform vs Not Reform - the subtext will be an election about preserving both Labour and Conservative as the parties they are and have been since the 1920s. That dominance, briefly threatened by thr Alliance, is now more strongly challenged by Reform.
Some good opportunities for Starmer to start showing that Labour could be a Party of change and at the same time show some dynamic and popular leadership. If he cant do it now while the right are fighting like rats in a sack and with an unhinged common enemy also of the right then probably time to start looking for a new more charismatic and decisive leader.
Another way of looking at this is: The Tories have finally seen that their only future is to lead the right of centre in people, policy, communications and showing clear difference between Tories and Reform. They only have one right of centre party to overcome and it is full of tricksters.
Labour face a larger challenge: LD, Green, Islamists, Jezbollah, SNP, PC. And the challenge of being in government in hard times. And these are not great times for changing who is PM, which is a messy process anyway.
Tory stock is rising steadily.
You may of course be correct. PB Tories are all talking a good job, but unless I am mistaken Mr Jenrick and Mr Rossindale beg to differ.
You're right that those two have floated to the top. Perhaps not for the reasons they'd like to think though.
Pvt. Leon has been crying in his bunk for a day and a half because the corned beef in his rat pack was too salty. Pvt. Roberts has been sewn into his sleeping bag by other members of the platoon because he wouldn't stop talking about how a resolution to this conflict could be achieved by liberalising planning regulations in the Greater Nuuk area. Pvt. Malmesbury was captured on patrol by a chalk of US Delta Force operators, they brought him back 10 minutes later under a flag of truce. Efforts to co-ordinate with the local insurgents continue, with Pvt. HYUFD instructing them on how to make Bangalore Torpedoes from fishing rods before he was driven off by a hail of thrown fish heads.
Conditions in the FOB remain habitable despite cold temperatures outside. We are warmed by the immense amounts of IR radiation coming off Cpl. Casino's face after he was issued a rainbow lanyard.
That’s a lot of privates. I would claim the crusty old Jock regularly pointing out that ‘we’re doomed, doomed ah tell ye’ role, but I feel there are stronger candidates.
Some good opportunities for Starmer to start showing that Labour could be a Party of change and at the same time show some dynamic and popular leadership. If he cant do it now while the right are fighting like rats in a sack and with an unhinged common enemy also of the right then probably time to start looking for a new more charismatic and decisive leader.
Another way of looking at this is: The Tories have finally seen that their only future is to lead the right of centre in people, policy, communications and showing clear difference between Tories and Reform. They only have one right of centre party to overcome and it is full of tricksters.
Labour face a larger challenge: LD, Green, Islamists, Jezbollah, SNP, PC. And the challenge of being in government in hard times. And these are not great times for changing who is PM, which is a messy process anyway.
Tory stock is rising steadily.
There can only be one market leader for the left and that will be Labour. The niche Lib Dems will no doubt keep their seats but the other relatively fringe parties will disappear into the ether. The battle is between the two parties of the right and it's pretty certain that will be resoved before the next election. I can't see it being Reform simply because I can't vizualise the UK having a government quite as ugly as one led by Farage.
Rawnsley isn't wrong - the "existential" battle for the "right" is analogous to that fought (briefly) between Labour and the SDP for the "centre left" forty or more years ago. As I've remarked frequently on here, the Falklands didn't just secure the Thatcher Premiership - it also secured Labour's position as the only credible alternative Government.
Labour's long road back began from the wreckage of the 1983 election just as the much shorter road back (as it turned out) started from the ruins of 2019.
The truth in the 1980s was there were more votes cast for Labour and the Alliance combined than for the Conservatives but all those anti-Conservative voters allowed the monolithic Conservative vote to win seat after seat.
Now, the roles are reversed (to an extent). The anti-Labour vote is split and there are plenty of seats where both Reform and the Conservatives will be fighting Labour and it may well be the latter will prevail more often than not against a split opposition.
The week's events have also, as Rawnsley suggests, ended the Rees-Mogg dream of a "unified Right". The Conservative aim in 2029 must be to confirm their status as the credible alternative Government - IF they lose that to Reform, they face the kind of irrelevance with which the LDs are all too familiar. That means not only finishing first or second in terms of seats but ensuring Reform stay on the fringes.
Here than is what we've always known - the duopoly is symbiotic. Labour needs the Conservatives, the Conservatives need Labour. Each is meaningless without the other. Labour would love the Conservatives to finish second again, in terms of seats, to keep the balance, the pattern, the form of politics.
The election of 2029 won't therefore just be Labour vs Not Labour and/or Reform vs Not Reform - the subtext will be an election about preserving both Labour and Conservative as the parties they are and have been since the 1920s. That dominance, briefly threatened by thr Alliance, is now more strongly challenged by Reform.
About half the Alliance voters preferred the Conservatives to Labour, polling at the time showed.
Some good opportunities for Starmer to start showing that Labour could be a Party of change and at the same time show some dynamic and popular leadership. If he cant do it now while the right are fighting like rats in a sack and with an unhinged common enemy also of the right then probably time to start looking for a new more charismatic and decisive leader.
Another way of looking at this is: The Tories have finally seen that their only future is to lead the right of centre in people, policy, communications and showing clear difference between Tories and Reform. They only have one right of centre party to overcome and it is full of tricksters.
Labour face a larger challenge: LD, Green, Islamists, Jezbollah, SNP, PC. And the challenge of being in government in hard times. And these are not great times for changing who is PM, which is a messy process anyway.
Tory stock is rising steadily.
There can only be one market leader for the left and that will be Labour. The niche Lib Dems will no doubt keep their seats but the other relatively fringe parties will disappear into the ether. The battle is between the two parties of the right and it's pretty certain that will be resoved before the next election. I can't see it being Reform simply because I can't vizualise the UK having a government quite as ugly as one led by Farage.
I hope you are right but I don't think anybody could visualise a Trump US but it happenned
Some good opportunities for Starmer to start showing that Labour could be a Party of change and at the same time show some dynamic and popular leadership. If he cant do it now while the right are fighting like rats in a sack and with an unhinged common enemy also of the right then probably time to start looking for a new more charismatic and decisive leader.
Another way of looking at this is: The Tories have finally seen that their only future is to lead the right of centre in people, policy, communications and showing clear difference between Tories and Reform. They only have one right of centre party to overcome and it is full of tricksters.
Labour face a larger challenge: LD, Green, Islamists, Jezbollah, SNP, PC. And the challenge of being in government in hard times. And these are not great times for changing who is PM, which is a messy process anyway.
Tory stock is rising steadily.
You may of course be correct. PB Tories are all talking a good job, but unless I am mistaken Mr Jenrick and Mr Rossindale beg to differ.
You should be pleased that Kemi has slammed Gill this am
Also Jenrick is not a conservative and Rossindale has denied the rumours
In an age of u turns does Badenoch finally realising Reform are not her friends constitute a u turn?
Every politician from the Conservatives on the right to Your Party on the extremities of reality needs to remind themselves that Nathan Gill took cash to speak up on behalf Putin-Russia, whilst some of his more illustrious friends did so, apparently, for free.
Pvt. Leon has been crying in his bunk for a day and a half because the corned beef in his rat pack was too salty. Pvt. Roberts has been sewn into his sleeping bag by other members of the platoon because he wouldn't stop talking about how a resolution to this conflict could be achieved by liberalising planning regulations in the Greater Nuuk area. Pvt. Malmesbury was captured on patrol by a chalk of US Delta Force operators, they brought him back 10 minutes later under a flag of truce. Efforts to co-ordinate with the local insurgents continue, with Pvt. HYUFD instructing them on how to make Bangalore Torpedoes from fishing rods before he was driven off by a hail of thrown fish heads.
Conditions in the FOB remain habitable despite cold temperatures outside. We are warmed by the immense amounts of IR radiation coming off Cpl. Casino's face after he was issued a rainbow lanyard.
Apparently Farage is under the weather and couldn’t make LK .
Yes right ! Obviously he didn’t want answer uncomfortable questions about his relationship with Trump .
Sick with worry Jenrick and Kruger are about to de-throne him ?
Unlikely to be that- partly because of the distinctive way RefUK is set up, mostly because Faragism without Farage just doesn't work. That question could end up shaping our conversations here, 2029-34.
Pvt. Leon has been crying in his bunk for a day and a half because the corned beef in his rat pack was too salty. Pvt. Roberts has been sewn into his sleeping bag by other members of the platoon because he wouldn't stop talking about how a resolution to this conflict could be achieved by liberalising planning regulations in the Greater Nuuk area. Pvt. Malmesbury was captured on patrol by a chalk of US Delta Force operators, they brought him back 10 minutes later under a flag of truce. Efforts to co-ordinate with the local insurgents continue, with Pvt. HYUFD instructing them on how to make Bangalore Torpedoes from fishing rods before he was driven off by a hail of thrown fish heads.
Conditions in the FOB remain habitable despite cold temperatures outside. We are warmed by the immense amounts of IR radiation coming off Cpl. Casino's face after he was issued a rainbow lanyard.
Rawnsley isn't wrong - the "existential" battle for the "right" is analogous to that fought (briefly) between Labour and the SDP for the "centre left" forty or more years ago. As I've remarked frequently on here, the Falklands didn't just secure the Thatcher Premiership - it also secured Labour's position as the only credible alternative Government.
Labour's long road back began from the wreckage of the 1983 election just as the much shorter road back (as it turned out) started from the ruins of 2019.
The truth in the 1980s was there were more votes cast for Labour and the Alliance combined than for the Conservatives but all those anti-Conservative voters allowed the monolithic Conservative vote to win seat after seat.
Now, the roles are reversed (to an extent). The anti-Labour vote is split and there are plenty of seats where both Reform and the Conservatives will be fighting Labour and it may well be the latter will prevail more often than not against a split opposition.
The week's events have also, as Rawnsley suggests, ended the Rees-Mogg dream of a "unified Right". The Conservative aim in 2029 must be to confirm their status as the credible alternative Government - IF they lose that to Reform, they face the kind of irrelevance with which the LDs are all too familiar. That means not only finishing first or second in terms of seats but ensuring Reform stay on the fringes.
Here than is what we've always known - the duopoly is symbiotic. Labour needs the Conservatives, the Conservatives need Labour. Each is meaningless without the other. Labour would love the Conservatives to finish second again, in terms of seats, to keep the balance, the pattern, the form of politics.
The election of 2029 won't therefore just be Labour vs Not Labour and/or Reform vs Not Reform - the subtext will be an election about preserving both Labour and Conservative as the parties they are and have been since the 1920s. That dominance, briefly threatened by thr Alliance, is now more strongly challenged by Reform.
About half the Alliance voters preferred the Conservatives to Labour, polling at the time showed.
Yes, but back then a lot of Labour voters would have preferred the Alliance to the Tories, and Tory voters the Alliance to Labour. Had they done just a little bit better, one or other of those would have come into play, and the symbiotic duopoly that our stodge describes might have been broken a few decades earlier.
Rawnsley isn't wrong - the "existential" battle for the "right" is analogous to that fought (briefly) between Labour and the SDP for the "centre left" forty or more years ago. As I've remarked frequently on here, the Falklands didn't just secure the Thatcher Premiership - it also secured Labour's position as the only credible alternative Government.
Labour's long road back began from the wreckage of the 1983 election just as the much shorter road back (as it turned out) started from the ruins of 2019.
The truth in the 1980s was there were more votes cast for Labour and the Alliance combined than for the Conservatives but all those anti-Conservative voters allowed the monolithic Conservative vote to win seat after seat.
Now, the roles are reversed (to an extent). The anti-Labour vote is split and there are plenty of seats where both Reform and the Conservatives will be fighting Labour and it may well be the latter will prevail more often than not against a split opposition.
The week's events have also, as Rawnsley suggests, ended the Rees-Mogg dream of a "unified Right". The Conservative aim in 2029 must be to confirm their status as the credible alternative Government - IF they lose that to Reform, they face the kind of irrelevance with which the LDs are all too familiar. That means not only finishing first or second in terms of seats but ensuring Reform stay on the fringes.
Here than is what we've always known - the duopoly is symbiotic. Labour needs the Conservatives, the Conservatives need Labour. Each is meaningless without the other. Labour would love the Conservatives to finish second again, in terms of seats, to keep the balance, the pattern, the form of politics.
The election of 2029 won't therefore just be Labour vs Not Labour and/or Reform vs Not Reform - the subtext will be an election about preserving both Labour and Conservative as the parties they are and have been since the 1920s. That dominance, briefly threatened by thr Alliance, is now more strongly challenged by Reform.
About half the Alliance voters preferred the Conservatives to Labour, polling at the time showed.
Yes and it will be interesting to see the polling on a similar question re: Reform today. The problem with Badenoch's strategy is whether she can deliver the Conservative vote - i.e: in a seat where Labour face a strong Reform challenge, will the remaining Conservatives be willing to vote Labour tactically to stop the Reform candidate or will they prefer Reform to Labour and hand the seat to Farage?
I remember, a couple of years back, someone here on PB was very insistent that the existence of alien life would be confirmed imminently. I wonder what became of that brave soul?
I suspect this soul was Leon. Yours truly, here, has also been interested, but as much with cultural.biases in the way UF0 claims have been reported or framed, rather than predicting one way or the other. I also do still fiind Avi Loeb's position on 3i/Atlas interesting. His stance on scientific openness is probably the most interesting of all.
Pace the risible @bondegezou, my interest in this has always been the semiotics, not the substance. Why are senior figures saying these truly bizarre things about UFOs and aliens?
This is another to add to the list. A particularly curious one, as it is British, a middling Bank of England economist, and yet it gets half a page in The Times?
The excuse of “it’s a slow news day” doesn’t really cut it, right now
Pvt. Leon has been crying in his bunk for a day and a half because the corned beef in his rat pack was too salty. Pvt. Roberts has been sewn into his sleeping bag by other members of the platoon because he wouldn't stop talking about how a resolution to this conflict could be achieved by liberalising planning regulations in the Greater Nuuk area. Pvt. Malmesbury was captured on patrol by a chalk of US Delta Force operators, they brought him back 10 minutes later under a flag of truce. Efforts to co-ordinate with the local insurgents continue, with Pvt. HYUFD instructing them on how to make Bangalore Torpedoes from fishing rods before he was driven off by a hail of thrown fish heads.
Conditions in the FOB remain habitable despite cold temperatures outside. We are warmed by the immense amounts of IR radiation coming off Cpl. Casino's face after he was issued a rainbow lanyard.
Rawnsley isn't wrong - the "existential" battle for the "right" is analogous to that fought (briefly) between Labour and the SDP for the "centre left" forty or more years ago. As I've remarked frequently on here, the Falklands didn't just secure the Thatcher Premiership - it also secured Labour's position as the only credible alternative Government.
Labour's long road back began from the wreckage of the 1983 election just as the much shorter road back (as it turned out) started from the ruins of 2019.
The truth in the 1980s was there were more votes cast for Labour and the Alliance combined than for the Conservatives but all those anti-Conservative voters allowed the monolithic Conservative vote to win seat after seat.
Now, the roles are reversed (to an extent). The anti-Labour vote is split and there are plenty of seats where both Reform and the Conservatives will be fighting Labour and it may well be the latter will prevail more often than not against a split opposition.
The week's events have also, as Rawnsley suggests, ended the Rees-Mogg dream of a "unified Right". The Conservative aim in 2029 must be to confirm their status as the credible alternative Government - IF they lose that to Reform, they face the kind of irrelevance with which the LDs are all too familiar. That means not only finishing first or second in terms of seats but ensuring Reform stay on the fringes.
Here than is what we've always known - the duopoly is symbiotic. Labour needs the Conservatives, the Conservatives need Labour. Each is meaningless without the other. Labour would love the Conservatives to finish second again, in terms of seats, to keep the balance, the pattern, the form of politics.
The election of 2029 won't therefore just be Labour vs Not Labour and/or Reform vs Not Reform - the subtext will be an election about preserving both Labour and Conservative as the parties they are and have been since the 1920s. That dominance, briefly threatened by thr Alliance, is now more strongly challenged by Reform.
About half the Alliance voters preferred the Conservatives to Labour, polling at the time showed.
Yes and it will be interesting to see the polling on a similar question re: Reform today. The problem with Badenoch's strategy is whether she can deliver the Conservative vote - i.e: in a seat where Labour face a strong Reform challenge, will the remaining Conservatives be willing to vote Labour tactically to stop the Reform candidate or will they prefer Reform to Labour and hand the seat to Farage?
Did most Labour voters vote Tory over SDP in 1983? No
I remember, a couple of years back, someone here on PB was very insistent that the existence of alien life would be confirmed imminently. I wonder what became of that brave soul?
I suspect this soul was Leon. Yours truly, here, has also been interested, but as much with cultural.biases in the way UF0 claims have been reported or framed, rather than predicting one way or the other. I also do still fiind Avi Loeb's position on 3i/Atlas interesting. His stance on scientific openness is probably the most interesting of all.
Pace the risible @bondegezou, my interest in this has always been the semiotics, not the substance. Why are senior figures saying these truly bizarre things about UFOs and aliens?
This is another to add to the list. A particularly curious one, as it is British, a middling Bank of England economist, and yet it gets half a page in The Times?
The excuse of “it’s a slow news day” doesn’t really cut it, right now
Why doesn't Laura K ask Richard Tice why Farage has backed out of his planned interview? Is she not curious? Might it - hear me out sounds crazy i know - he doesn't want to criticise his best buddy in the WH? The guy wants to be PM but runs away when Trump attacks us through tariffs?
Some good opportunities for Starmer to start showing that Labour could be a Party of change and at the same time show some dynamic and popular leadership. If he cant do it now while the right are fighting like rats in a sack and with an unhinged common enemy also of the right then probably time to start looking for a new more charismatic and decisive leader.
Another way of looking at this is: The Tories have finally seen that their only future is to lead the right of centre in people, policy, communications and showing clear difference between Tories and Reform. They only have one right of centre party to overcome and it is full of tricksters.
Labour face a larger challenge: LD, Green, Islamists, Jezbollah, SNP, PC. And the challenge of being in government in hard times. And these are not great times for changing who is PM, which is a messy process anyway.
Tory stock is rising steadily.
There can only be one market leader for the left and that will be Labour. The niche Lib Dems will no doubt keep their seats but the other relatively fringe parties will disappear into the ether. The battle is between the two parties of the right and it's pretty certain that will be resoved before the next election. I can't see it being Reform simply because I can't vizualise the UK having a government quite as ugly as one led by Farage.
That's quite an impressive amount of unsupported wishful thinking for a five line post.
Not to say you're wrong, but why can there only be one market leader for the left? Why does it have to be Labour? Why will the Conservatives beat Reform other than your personal preference for them? And why will the battle be resolved before the next election?
An awful lot has to go right for that to happen, and if you look around Europe there's not much conclusive evidence that returning to the old two-party duopoly is likely.
I remember, a couple of years back, someone here on PB was very insistent that the existence of alien life would be confirmed imminently. I wonder what became of that brave soul?
I suspect this soul was Leon. Yours truly, here, has also been interested, but as much with cultural.biases in the way UF0 claims have been reported or framed, rather than predicting one way or the other. I also do still fiind Avi Loeb's position on 3i/Atlas interesting. His stance on scientific openness is probably the most interesting of all.
Pace the risible @bondegezou, my interest in this has always been the semiotics, not the substance. Why are senior figures saying these truly bizarre things about UFOs and aliens?
This is another to add to the list. A particularly curious one, as it is British, a middling Bank of England economist, and yet it gets half a page in The Times?
The excuse of “it’s a slow news day” doesn’t really cut it, right now
Rawnsley isn't wrong - the "existential" battle for the "right" is analogous to that fought (briefly) between Labour and the SDP for the "centre left" forty or more years ago. As I've remarked frequently on here, the Falklands didn't just secure the Thatcher Premiership - it also secured Labour's position as the only credible alternative Government.
Labour's long road back began from the wreckage of the 1983 election just as the much shorter road back (as it turned out) started from the ruins of 2019.
The truth in the 1980s was there were more votes cast for Labour and the Alliance combined than for the Conservatives but all those anti-Conservative voters allowed the monolithic Conservative vote to win seat after seat.
Now, the roles are reversed (to an extent). The anti-Labour vote is split and there are plenty of seats where both Reform and the Conservatives will be fighting Labour and it may well be the latter will prevail more often than not against a split opposition.
The week's events have also, as Rawnsley suggests, ended the Rees-Mogg dream of a "unified Right". The Conservative aim in 2029 must be to confirm their status as the credible alternative Government - IF they lose that to Reform, they face the kind of irrelevance with which the LDs are all too familiar. That means not only finishing first or second in terms of seats but ensuring Reform stay on the fringes.
Here than is what we've always known - the duopoly is symbiotic. Labour needs the Conservatives, the Conservatives need Labour. Each is meaningless without the other. Labour would love the Conservatives to finish second again, in terms of seats, to keep the balance, the pattern, the form of politics.
The election of 2029 won't therefore just be Labour vs Not Labour and/or Reform vs Not Reform - the subtext will be an election about preserving both Labour and Conservative as the parties they are and have been since the 1920s. That dominance, briefly threatened by thr Alliance, is now more strongly challenged by Reform.
About half the Alliance voters preferred the Conservatives to Labour, polling at the time showed.
Yes and it will be interesting to see the polling on a similar question re: Reform today. The problem with Badenoch's strategy is whether she can deliver the Conservative vote - i.e: in a seat where Labour face a strong Reform challenge, will the remaining Conservatives be willing to vote Labour tactically to stop the Reform candidate or will they prefer Reform to Labour and hand the seat to Farage?
Did most Labour voters vote Tory over SDP in 1983? No
Isn't this somewhat different? The party according to the current opinion polls most likely to form the next government is actively hostile to our values and our allies's values, and is adjacent and supportive of two hostile fascist dictatorships. Christopher Doggerbank- Trawler* was no traitor.
I remember, a couple of years back, someone here on PB was very insistent that the existence of alien life would be confirmed imminently. I wonder what became of that brave soul?
He’s being held somewhere in the vicinity of Alpha Centaurii?
I don't know where that is. Can you give me its what.three.words location?
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
What if the real motivation is ending NATO, and Greenland is the pretext to get Trump to do it ?
The appeal of territorial aggrandisement to Trump is quite obvious. That any of this is of absolutely no practical benefit (and potential massive cost) to the US isn't really relevant.
Stretch goal is to move a couple of hundred thousand reliable MAGA voters up there and give it statehood. If someone points out to him the existence of a Washington State, the absence of a Trump State would be unendurable.
Apparently Farage is under the weather and couldn’t make LK .
Yes right ! Obviously he didn’t want answer uncomfortable questions about his relationship with Trump .
That assumes LK would have even asked...
One must be a political lightweight if they baulk at the idea of an interview with LK. She probably wouldn't even have mentioned Greenland outside the context of some sort of Starmer- hostility anyway. Any potentially hostile questioning would doubtless have been underarm and pedestrian, and the focus would have been on "nice" things like Honest Bob.
Why doesn't Laura K ask Richard Tice why Farage has backed out of his planned interview? Is she not curious? Might it - hear me out sounds crazy i know - he doesn't want to criticise his best buddy in the WH? The guy wants to be PM but runs away when Trump attacks us through tariffs?
Be fair. If you do as much sucking up to foreign strongmen as Nigel Farage does, an occasional sore throat is to be expected.
Greenland has been an interesting case of something unifying British opinion across the wings, so much so that Farage has been forced to express mild disapproval.
What I’ve found more interesting is how this flushes out the obviously fake “British” alt-right accounts on Twitter. After every post by a UK politician on this there’s a slew of England flag patriot commenters all spouting a variation either on MAGA talking points (Denmark evil colonist, Greenland vulnerable to Chinese takeover) or none of our business sentiments. They’re so obviously not actually British. They’re by and large very formulaic. As suspect as the multitude of great replacement theory posts after anything else about the UK. The question is are they Russian (funded), Iranian, Chinese, or is it possible MAGA has its own troop of trolls on the payroll?
Similar copy-paste pattern in French language responses, though there are fewer of those.
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
It’s very big on the map and close to the US.
More importantly, it has a shitload of resources to plunder into the pockets of Trump Inc.
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
What if the real motivation is ending NATO, and Greenland is the pretext to get Trump to do it ?
The appeal of territorial aggrandisement to Trump is quite obvious. That any of this is of absolutely no practical benefit (and potential massive cost) to the US isn't really relevant.
Stretch goal is to move a couple of hundred thousand reliable MAGA voters up there and give it statehood. If someone points out to him the existence of a Washington State, the absence of a Trump State would be unendurable.
As soon as he is gone, there will be an intense effort to erase every mention of "Trump" from history.
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
It’s very big on the map and close to the US.
See also Canada
Lucky old Mexico, fewer natural resources and white people.
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
It's economic war rather than actual war but with the same effect.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
What if the real motivation is ending NATO, and Greenland is the pretext to get Trump to do it ?
The appeal of territorial aggrandisement to Trump is quite obvious. That any of this is of absolutely no practical benefit (and potential massive cost) to the US isn't really relevant.
Stretch goal is to move a couple of hundred thousand reliable MAGA voters up there and give it statehood. If someone points out to him the existence of a Washington State, the absence of a Trump State would be unendurable.
Trump thinks Greenland is his version of the Klondike. Only it won't be old fellows with riddles but petrochemical giants with big f***-off drilling equipment.
Comments
They have moulds for a couple of thousand different sets of models, though counting them is a bit complicated.
But it would be likely a lot more expensive to make duplicate moulds for both sides of the Atlantic.
I’ve never come across spin moulding in my career only in my ONC/HNC/HND years. I’ve sourced metal spun products but that’s different.
Certainly with these figures they feel different in metal. A little bit more robust and substantive. But I guess plastic moulding has the advantage of being quick as a process for larger volume runs and less labour intensive.
Warhammer World will be just an events space. Doesn't mean anything in manufacturing terms.
Surely they would only make duplicate tools for high running volume and as the tools had already been designed once the cost of making a second set would be less expensive than the first and they wouldn’t need to make them all, just the high runners.
Also when they make new tools they could look to refurbish the old tools and transfer them. That’s what I did on a recent project where I sourced some new tools as the old were reaching end of life and we had a budget.
A six figure sum to make a mould. I’ve sourced plenty of injection mould tools in my time. That’s the sort of cost I’d pay for complex interior trim that’s a substantial size with quite a few moving parts and a hot runner. What is involved ?
Tooling really got less expensive in a few phases when it moved from the U.K. to Spain/Portugal then to Eastern Europe and then to the Far East.
Can we not discuss class 37s instead?
No wonder Dave Gilmour has little time for him.
https://x.com/nazaninnour/status/2012370808232939751?s=61
The problem with spin casting is that most model designers for GW work in 3-ups these days rather than to scale. The conversion to 35mm is much easier when you are injection moulding for plastic rather than metal spin moulding.
Ian Livingston, who founded Games Workshop and did the Fighting Fantasy books with Steve Jackson, used to have a pub band called the Jackson Four and used to do terrible (sorry Ian) gigs to tiny audiences in pubs in the Richmond area.
It is going to be a merciless grapple for supremacy on the right. That is the conclusion I draw from the outpourings of bitterness and bile triggered by the rattery of Robert Jenrick.
“He’s the ultimate careerist and saw his chances of succeeding Badenoch slipping away,” remarks one senior Tory, offering the most widely accepted explanation for his defection. “I’ve put aside my personal ambition,” is the most risibly untrue thing he said last Thursday.
Both his old party and his new one believe they have gained from these events. Mr Farage is calculating that accepting Tories who served in the last government is a price worth paying to compensate for Reform’s glaring lack of ministerial experience, even if their track record is one which he routinely lambasts as a litany of lies and incompetence. Mrs Badenoch’s generally admired handling of the episode has added a dab of lustre to her leadership.
Reform, 10 points ahead of the Tories, reckons it is still in the box seat and expects its claim to be the principal party of opposition to be vindicated with handsome gains in the May elections. Neither the blue corner nor the turquoise one think they have any incentive to parley. “Never!” spits one senior Tory MP. “They’re out to destroy us.” There’s no deal to be done when the fear and loathing is so pronounced. Forget any notions of “uniting the right”. It is going to be mortal combat.
US bobsleigh team’s farcical run becomes perfect metaphor amid Greenland threats
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/news/us-bobsleigh-teams-farcical-run-becomes-perfect-metaphor-amid-greenland-threats-402210/
I see the moron has decided to place tariffs on allies who don't agree he can unilaterally annex their territory.
Surely the significance is that he saw the Conservatives' chance at the next election slipping away so his route back to power is via Reform and to Number 10 through replacing Nigel Farage.
No, in the article the unnamed senior Tory said it was because Jenrick's chances of succeeding Kemi were slipping away. That does not seem to be true, at least insofar as the betting markets priced him as clear favourite with no-one else in the same parish.
So the point is not that Jenrick's chances of being Tory leader were disappearing (they weren't) but that being Tory leader is not the prize it once was if Reform are on course to win the election.
"The Bank of England must plan for a financial crisis caused by an official announcement confirming thr existence of aliens."
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/scotland/article/bank-of-england-must-prepare-for-ufo-announcement-f3mh8l9vh
Johnson might be an exception, also sort of Rishi Sunak (at the second go).
Good morning, everyone.
Kemi taking on Reform and Farage
In another article she attacks Gill and his links with Russia
There is no doubt she has no intention of doing a deal
https://x.com/i/status/2012542667092058427
An unnamed Number Ten Source blaming Darren Jones. Who is currently Chief Secretary to the PM.
Call me a grumpy, middle-aged cynic, but who in Number Ten might want to clip the wings of the Chief Secretary to the PM?
Morg... sorry, More on this as we get it.
The Chief Secretary to the PM has direct access to the PM, he doesn't need to use a paper to get his point across..
Streeting is an effective minister, is the desire within the Civil service to remove all effective ministers so they can screw things up more efficiently.
Fascinating though.
This afternoon I’m going to look this up on YouTube. Still have a strong affection for engineering even though retired.
As many pointed out here a year ago, NATO is finished in all but name and Europe needs to start spending to defend Ukraine and (ultimately) itself from Russia.
But I still just don't get why Trump cares about Greenland...
Labour face a larger challenge: LD, Green, Islamists, Jezbollah, SNP, PC. And the challenge of being in government in hard times. And these are not great times for changing who is PM, which is a messy process anyway.
Tory stock is rising steadily.
Yours truly, here, has also been interested, but as much with cultural.biases in the way UF0 claims have been reported or framed, rather than predicting one way or the other.
I also do still fiind Avi Loeb's position on 3i/Atlas interesting. His stance on scientific openness is probably the most interesting of all.
Pvt. Leon has been crying in his bunk for a day and a half because the corned beef in his rat pack was too salty. Pvt. Roberts has been sewn into his sleeping bag by other members of the platoon because he wouldn't stop talking about how a resolution to this conflict could be achieved by liberalising planning regulations in the Greater Nuuk area. Pvt. Malmesbury was captured on patrol by a chalk of US Delta Force operators, they brought him back 10 minutes later under a flag of truce. Efforts to co-ordinate with the local insurgents continue, with Pvt. HYUFD instructing them on how to make Bangalore Torpedoes from fishing rods before he was driven off by a hail of thrown fish heads.
Conditions in the FOB remain habitable despite cold temperatures outside. We are warmed by the immense amounts of IR radiation coming off Cpl. Casino's face after he was issued a rainbow lanyard.
I might shoot them all myself.
Cdr. Dura Ace, Officer Commanding, PB Expeditionary Force, Greenland
Make America Go Away
Also Jenrick is not a conservative and Rossindale has denied the rumours
Lisa Nandy effectively says she thinks Reform is a "facist" party
Asked whether she'd use the label, she tells Trevor Phillips "if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it's probably a duck"
Rawnsley isn't wrong - the "existential" battle for the "right" is analogous to that fought (briefly) between Labour and the SDP for the "centre left" forty or more years ago. As I've remarked frequently on here, the Falklands didn't just secure the Thatcher Premiership - it also secured Labour's position as the only credible alternative Government.
Labour's long road back began from the wreckage of the 1983 election just as the much shorter road back (as it turned out) started from the ruins of 2019.
The truth in the 1980s was there were more votes cast for Labour and the Alliance combined than for the Conservatives but all those anti-Conservative voters allowed the monolithic Conservative vote to win seat after seat.
Now, the roles are reversed (to an extent). The anti-Labour vote is split and there are plenty of seats where both Reform and the Conservatives will be fighting Labour and it may well be the latter will prevail more often than not against a split opposition.
The week's events have also, as Rawnsley suggests, ended the Rees-Mogg dream of a "unified Right". The Conservative aim in 2029 must be to confirm their status as the credible alternative Government - IF they lose that to Reform, they face the kind of irrelevance with which the LDs are all too familiar. That means not only finishing first or second in terms of seats but ensuring Reform stay on the fringes.
Here than is what we've always known - the duopoly is symbiotic. Labour needs the Conservatives, the Conservatives need Labour. Each is meaningless without the other. Labour would love the Conservatives to finish second again, in terms of seats, to keep the balance, the pattern, the form of politics.
The election of 2029 won't therefore just be Labour vs Not Labour and/or Reform vs Not Reform - the subtext will be an election about preserving both Labour and Conservative as the parties they are and have been since the 1920s. That dominance, briefly threatened by thr Alliance, is now more strongly challenged by Reform.
I would claim the crusty old Jock regularly pointing out that ‘we’re doomed, doomed ah tell ye’ role, but I feel there are stronger candidates.
Yes right ! Obviously he didn’t want answer uncomfortable questions about his relationship with Trump .
Every politician from the Conservatives on the right to Your Party on the extremities of reality needs to remind themselves that Nathan Gill took cash to speak up on behalf Putin-Russia, whilst some of his more illustrious friends did so, apparently, for free.
Having said that...
Don't you think he looks tired?
https://x.com/lucytcwife/status/2012257727683178840?s=61&t=LYVEHh2mqFy1oUJAdCfe-Q
This is another to add to the list. A particularly curious one, as it is British, a middling Bank of England economist, and yet it gets half a page in The Times?
The excuse of “it’s a slow news day” doesn’t really cut it, right now
Why doesn't Laura K ask Richard Tice why Farage has backed out of his planned interview? Is she not curious? Might it - hear me out sounds crazy i know - he doesn't want to criticise his best buddy in the WH? The guy wants to be PM but runs away when Trump attacks us through tariffs?
@alastairmeeks.bsky.social
Be fair. If you do as much sucking up to foreign strongmen as Nigel Farage does, an occasional sore throat is to be expected.
Not to say you're wrong, but why can there only be one market leader for the left? Why does it have to be Labour? Why will the Conservatives beat Reform other than your personal preference for them? And why will the battle be resolved before the next election?
An awful lot has to go right for that to happen, and if you look around Europe there's not much conclusive evidence that returning to the old two-party duopoly is likely.
* Thanks I believe to Alan Coren.
Genuine affinity for it.
I once spent a week visiting Spanish moulders for the NMUK project I was working on, for a tier 1.
Zaragoza region
The moulded were okay. The food cracking. Especially the small rural bistros.
The appeal of territorial aggrandisement to Trump is quite obvious. That any of this is of absolutely no practical benefit (and potential massive cost) to the US isn't really relevant.
Stretch goal is to move a couple of hundred thousand reliable MAGA voters up there and give it statehood.
If someone points out to him the existence of a Washington State, the absence of a Trump State would be unendurable.
It was never going to be Frost-Nixon.
What I’ve found more interesting is how this flushes out the obviously fake “British” alt-right accounts on Twitter. After every post by a UK politician on this there’s a slew of England flag patriot commenters all spouting a variation either on MAGA talking points (Denmark evil colonist, Greenland vulnerable to Chinese takeover) or none of our business sentiments. They’re so obviously not actually British. They’re by and large very formulaic. As suspect as the multitude of great replacement theory posts after anything else about the UK. The question is are they Russian (funded), Iranian, Chinese, or is it possible MAGA has its own troop of trolls on the payroll?
Similar copy-paste pattern in French language responses, though there are fewer of those.