politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » GE 2015 – the view of the spread betting trader

Excellent piece, thanks Aidan.

Fascinating article! How did the spread betting markets perform in 2010?

CarlottaVance said:

Fascinating article! How did the spread betting markets perform in 2010?

They performed quite well for Sporting Index, IIRC.

'tory seats will not be welcome' suggests that even though the SPIN for tory seats seems high compared to the forecasts, the money is even higher. Am I right or have I misunderstood?

Pong said:

CarlottaVance said:

Fascinating article! How did the spread betting markets perform in 2010?

They performed quite well for Sporting Index, IIRC.

The midpoint for Labour seats was 216. They actually got 257.

asjohnstone said:

botanically_speaking said:

'tory seats will not be welcome' suggests that even though the SPIN for tory seats seems high compared to the forecasts, the money is even higher. Am I right or have I misunderstood?

Reading between the lines the thrust of the article is, he thinks the market is seriously over estimating the tories chance, his book is out of whack and he thinks buying labour at current spreads is rational.

Yes?

Yes.

When the data suggests one thing and the "mood music" (read: the number of Tory posters you see on your drive to work, the voting intention of your window cleaner, your gut) suggests another, it is wise to go with the numbers. Ed for PM and Labour most seats both represent very good value, I've piled on.

asjohnstone said:

botanically_speaking said:

'tory seats will not be welcome' suggests that even though the SPIN for tory seats seems high compared to the forecasts, the money is even higher. Am I right or have I misunderstood?

Reading between the lines the thrust of the article is, he thinks the market is seriously over estimating the tories chance, his book is out of whack and he thinks buying labour at current spreads is rational.

Yes?

I assume so. I'm only on here because I can't sleep and frankly spread betting fries my brain at the best of times. Right now I have no idea

How big is ICM's final sample going to be. According to the wiki, the current poll is based on 1500 respondents. The normal ICM is ~1000.

10.4.20: On polling day the BBC, in common with other broadcasters, will cease to report campaigns from 06.00 until the polls close. Coverage will be restricted to uncontroversial factual accounts, such as the appearance of politicians at polling stations or the weather. Subjects which have been at issue or part of the campaign, or other controversial matters relating to the election, must not receive coverage on polling day, to ensure that nothing in the BBC's output can be construed as influencing the ballot while the polls are open. [BBC Editorial Guidelines on Elections]

If only this had applied during the rest of the campaign...

This may be useful for some of us on PB (myself included):

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2015/05/06/22/2862C6CB00000578-0-image-a-46_1430949255075.jpg

JosiasJessop said:

Good morning everybody!

Are we all excited? ;-)

Yep, luckily i can sleep through the boring bit of election day, and wake up in time for the results show

Good luck to all the candidates and canvassers on PB!!

Voting is easy, just use a cross, but most candidates don't like the nails.

dr_spyn said:

Voting is easy, just use a cross, but most candidates don't like the nails.

LOL

In the past we've discussed FB and social media at elections. I logged on to FB this morning to find a 'I'm a voter' and 'more information' buttons at the top of the page. Apparently 123,000 people had already said they are voters.

The more information page led to:
http://www.aboutmyvote.co.uk/how-do-i-vote/voting-in-person

CarlottaVance said:

asjohnstone said:

Pong said:

CarlottaVance said:

Fascinating article! How did the spread betting markets perform in 2010?

They performed quite well for Sporting Index, IIRC.

The midpoint for Labour seats was 216. They actually got 257.

So Labour were out by 40 - so today would be heading for ±305 - possibly minus the Scotland effect, or is that priced in - who knows?

Whoever you support - VOTE - either that or STFU for the next five years (or five months, if it ends up like that....)

Of course Guernsey has no direct role in the election - though I think it would be fair to say we're not looking forward to a government one of whose front benchers recently asked 'who is Guernsey's MP?

Would the people of Guernsey like an MP or are they happy with the status quo?

Richard Nabavi

" Who knows? To be honest I've not given it much thought, since if, God forbid, we do end up with Ed Miliband in No 10, there will be much more important things to worry about than David Cameron. In any case his place in history as one of the very best post-war PMs is already assured."

Have you ever thought about doing 'stand-up'?

Actually, are there any rules about prams and babies/toddlers in polling stations?

Roger said:

Richard Nabavi

" Who knows? To be honest I've not given it much thought, since if, God forbid, we do end up with Ed Miliband in No 10, there will be much more important things to worry about than David Cameron. In any case his place in history as one of the very best post-war PMs is already assured."

Have you ever thought about doing 'stand-up'?

I think he's already started, he's the Sussex Bernard Manning

Roger said:

Richard Nabavi

Who knows? To be honest I've not given it much thought, since if, God forbid, we do end up with Ed Miliband in No 10, there will be much more important things to worry about than David Cameron.

In any case his place in history as one of the very best post-war PMs is already assured."

Have you ever thought about doing 'stand-up'?

There is a good chance that history will judge Cameron much better than Brown or Blair, at the very least. Holding together a coalition during the economic crisis was not easy. Blair had it easy with a large majority and will be stained by the wars, whilst Brown will be stained by the economic crash and Labour's tribal infighting, much of which he caused.

Major's reputation seems to have been rehabilitated since he left power. Blair and Brown's have both plummeted. Time will tell which way Cameron's will go: Richard might well be correct.

JosiasJessop said:

Actually, are there any rules about prams and babies/toddlers in polling stations?

They're not allowed to draw on the ballot paper. Do expect to be smiled at.

surbiton said:

OblitusSumMe said:

CarlottaVance said:

asjohnstone said:

Pong said:

CarlottaVance said:

Fascinating article! How did the spread betting markets perform in 2010?

They performed quite well for Sporting Index, IIRC.

The midpoint for Labour seats was 216. They actually got 257.

So Labour were out by 40 - so today would be heading for ±305 - possibly minus the Scotland effect, or is that priced in - who knows?

Whoever you support - VOTE - either that or STFU for the next five years (or five months, if it ends up like that....)

Of course Guernsey has no direct role in the election - though I think it would be fair to say we're not looking forward to a government one of whose front benchers recently asked 'who is Guernsey's MP?

Would the people of Guernsey like an MP or are they happy with the status quo?

Would the people of Guernsey like an MP or should they STFU ?
Also make sure no taxes that would be payable in the UK is hidden. All accounts must be transparent to the BoE and HMRC.

They aren't part of the UK, though?

So here's my list of the 27 seats Labour has to win plus the 17 they need to win. https://ukelect.wordpress.com/2015/05/07/election-day-2015-the-key-seats/

Roger said:

Alanbrooke

" I think he's already started, he's the Sussex Bernard Manning"

Did you hear the one about the 'near perfect Chancellor'?

Hear it, I lived it as the moeny flowed out of my bank account.

Life_ina_market_town said:

JosiasJessop said:

Actually, are there any rules about prams and babies/toddlers in polling stations?

The Presiding Officer at a polling station is not obliged to exclude children under 18 accompanying a voter (para 32(1)(b) of schedule 1 to Representation of the People Act 1983). That means for all intents and purposes such children are entitled to admission to a polling station to accompany the voter while he votes.

Thanks. I assumed that was the case, or it would make voting very difficult for some people.

Are queues developing at polling stations? No? I'm shocked after the excitement of the campaign we just had.

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Richard Nabavi

Who knows? To be honest I've not given it much thought, since if, God forbid, we do end up with Ed Miliband in No 10, there will be much more important things to worry about than David Cameron.

In any case his place in history as one of the very best post-war PMs is already assured."

Have you ever thought about doing 'stand-up'?

There is a good chance that history will judge Cameron much better than Brown or Blair, at the very least. Holding together a coalition during the economic crisis was not easy. Blair had it easy with a large majority and will be stained by the wars, whilst Brown will be stained by the economic crash and Labour's tribal infighting, much of which he caused.

Major's reputation seems to have been rehabilitated since he left power. Blair and Brown's have both plummeted. Time will tell which way Cameron's will go: Richard might well be correct.

He is correct. Comparisons will be made around what he inherited and what he left. The country is now in a far better state than in 2010.

Casino_Royale said:

Good morning campers. It's brown trousers time.

Chill Winston! We're going to get a hung parliament and a weak PM will emerge after a few days. If it's Dave he won't be able to do anything much to scare the horses. If it's Ed he'll try, with tartan support, and will have an utterly torrid time of it. Let's all sit back and look froward to the next general election in, say, October.

Where are Ashcroft and Mori ?!!

Morning all!

So here it is, the calm before the storm. Good luck to all candidates and supporters. Well done to anyone involved in the organisation and counting, you have a very responsible job. For the rest of us, vote, work, sleep, get up in time for the exit poll, count winnings as they come in (hopefully!!).

Fingers crossed we will have a result with a feasible government at the end of it, rather than the predicted chaos!

Alanbrooke said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Richard Nabavi

Who knows? To be honest I've not given it much thought, since if, God forbid, we do end up with Ed Miliband in No 10, there will be much more important things to worry about than David Cameron.

In any case his place in history as one of the very best post-war PMs is already assured."

Have you ever thought about doing 'stand-up'?

There is a good chance that history will judge Cameron much better than Brown or Blair, at the very least. Holding together a coalition during the economic crisis was not easy. Blair had it easy with a large majority and will be stained by the wars, whilst Brown will be stained by the economic crash and Labour's tribal infighting, much of which he caused.

Major's reputation seems to have been rehabilitated since he left power. Blair and Brown's have both plummeted. Time will tell which way Cameron's will go: Richard might well be correct.

hmmm

I think Cameron will be judged by his own benchmark that he'd make a pretty good PM, whereas he's been pretty average.

Cameron always strikes me as someone who has underachieved his potential.

It's the politics he's not very good at. The 2010 election campaign, the 2015 campaign, the management of his own party, his own MPs, the positioning within the EU, selling his mission statement to the general public and triangulating his policy positions to try and demonstrate modernisation, and curry the most votes.

That's why he'll lose. In pure administrative terms, the competence of this government has been quite good - and much better than Labour - particularly on jobs, tax, economy, infrastructure, science, pensions, welfare and education reform.

Cosmic said:

Thought Ashcroft was meant to be 6am...

I thought it was 8am

I have been saying since January at least that the markets are out of line with the polling and severely over estimating the Tory chances. If Sporting Index are carrying a substantial book based on their mid points I expect them to once again make a lot of money.

The final set of polls last night seemed to me to make the Conservatives being the largest party almost impossible and one simply has to apply the regional swings from Yougov to see how seats are going to fall.

I have frankly not understood Tory party strategy at all. They have spent their time chasing a couple of dozen Lib Dem seats and not done nearly enough to fight the 50-60 seats they are going to lose to Labour today. It seems bizarre to me, particularly when their only chance of maintaining power was to go into a second coalition with the same Lib Dem party diminished by the loss of the seats they are chasing.

Only the disaster in Scotland is going to stop Ed having an overall majority today. I think Labour most seats is inevitable despite this. It frankly depresses me that firstly in the referendum and now in the GE such a large percentage of our population put so little weight on fiscal sanity, sound government, sound money and a recognition that the State has to be paid for. But that's the way it is and today the Tories are going to suffer the consequences. In Scotland of course the people in their wisdom have determined that Labour is not lunatic enough and have found something even more unrealistic.

I expect Cameron to have resigned by this time tomorrow.

Amazingly, hung parliament is still available at 1.06. Absolutely crazy.

If I had a spare £20,000 in cash, I would just bung it all on there now.

Casino_Royale said:

Alanbrooke said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Richard Nabavi

Who knows? To be honest I've not given it much thought, since if, God forbid, we do end up with Ed Miliband in No 10, there will be much more important things to worry about than David Cameron.

In any case his place in history as one of the very best post-war PMs is already assured."

Have you ever thought about doing 'stand-up'?

There is a good chance that history will judge Cameron much better than Brown or Blair, at the very least. Holding together a coalition during the economic crisis was not easy. Blair had it easy with a large majority and will be stained by the wars, whilst Brown will be stained by the economic crash and Labour's tribal infighting, much of which he caused.

Major's reputation seems to have been rehabilitated since he left power. Blair and Brown's have both plummeted. Time will tell which way Cameron's will go: Richard might well be correct.

hmmm

I think Cameron will be judged by his own benchmark that he'd make a pretty good PM, whereas he's been pretty average.

Cameron always strikes me as someone who has underachieved his potential.

It's the politics he's not very good at. The 2010 election campaign, the 2015 campaign, the management of his own party, his own MPs, the positioning within the EU, selling his mission statement to the general public and triangulating his policy positions to try and demonstrate modernisation, and curry the most votes.

That's why he'll lose. In pure administrative terms, the competence of this government has been quite good - and much better than Labour - particularly on jobs, tax, economy, infrastructure, science, pensions, welfare and education reform.

Far, far too early to judge on any of those. They have changed things. But the outcomes are a long way from being known.

Alanbrooke said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Richard Nabavi

Who knows? To be honest I've not given it much thought, since if, God forbid, we do end up with Ed Miliband in No 10, there will be much more important things to worry about than David Cameron.

In any case his place in history as one of the very best post-war PMs is already assured."

Have you ever thought about doing 'stand-up'?

There is a good chance that history will judge Cameron much better than Brown or Blair, at the very least. Holding together a coalition during the economic crisis was not easy. Blair had it easy with a large majority and will be stained by the wars, whilst Brown will be stained by the economic crash and Labour's tribal infighting, much of which he caused.

Major's reputation seems to have been rehabilitated since he left power. Blair and Brown's have both plummeted. Time will tell which way Cameron's will go: Richard might well be correct.

hmmm

I think Cameron will be judged by his own benchmark that he'd make a pretty good PM, whereas he's been pretty average.

Cameron always strikes me as someone who has underachieved his potential.

You might be right in that. However that is not inconsistent with him being great, if his potential was huge. ;-)

The problem is we are too close to the situation at the moment; his political history is still being written (and may continue for another few years). But whatever happens, I cannot see him being judged worse than his two predecessors.

DavidL said:

I expect Cameron to have resigned by this time tomorrow.

I would hope that any Prime Minister would seek an audience with Her Majesty at a more civilised time than 7.10 am.

indianhaven said:

Is the price of Cameron to be PM after the election a reflection of the wording of the market rules? "Who will be Prime Minister when the first Government is formed after the General Election". In the event that Cameron tries to pass a Queens Speech, but fails, might he still be deemed to have formed a Government?

In my reading of the rules, the key phrase appears to be "royal assent" does he have to go back to the palace and kiss hands again? If fresh ministerial warrants are being issued and a new cabinet formed then, it'd pay out on Dave.

Regardless of this, I don't think there is any possibility of a Queens speech being voted down, If Cameron isn't 100% certain it'll pass then he'll not write one. A monarchs speech hasn't failed to pass in 91 years

Plato said:

I'm telling for the first time today - any advice?

Be nice to everyone - opposing tellers, voters, officials, whoever. It's a relaxing day, you're all working together to make it go smoothly, you can't affect the result.

JosiasJessop said:

Actually, are there any rules about prams and babies/toddlers in polling stations?

The officials decide but you won't have a problem.

I don't think that at this point anything I say will make much difference, so I'll offer a prediction.

LAB 280
CON 271
SNP 50
LD 24
UKIP 2 (Carswell and Farage)
PC 3
GRN 1
SPK 1
NI 18
Total 650

But keep in mind that I only know much about the East Midlands - otherwise I'm just guessing. We expect to take at least half our target seats. In my patch there was what felt like a late shift yesterday to Labour - we were getting people who had told us a month ago that they were probably UKIP (we recanvassed them at the risk of stirring them up because in my patch if they do go and vote UKIP, it won't affect the outcome). But it's possible that Con-UKIP people were going Con, who knows? I do think UKIP will underperform compared with polls, though I reckon name recognition will see Farage home.

Plato said:

If you missed Brooker's Election Wipe - it's well worth catching on replay. Some great observations, especially on immigration.

I've got Brooker, Newzoids and Ballot Monkeys to watch this morning - then I'll decide who to vote for!

Casino_Royale said:

Alanbrooke said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Richard Nabavi

Who knows? To be honest I've not given it much thought, since if, God forbid, we do end up with Ed Miliband in No 10, there will be much more important things to worry about than David Cameron.

In any case his place in history as one of the very best post-war PMs is already assured."

Have you ever thought about doing 'stand-up'?

There is a good chance that history will judge Cameron much better than Brown or Blair, at the very least. Holding together a coalition during the economic crisis was not easy. Blair had it easy with a large majority and will be stained by the wars, whilst Brown will be stained by the economic crash and Labour's tribal infighting, much of which he caused.

Major's reputation seems to have been rehabilitated since he left power. Blair and Brown's have both plummeted. Time will tell which way Cameron's will go: Richard might well be correct.

hmmm

I think Cameron will be judged by his own benchmark that he'd make a pretty good PM, whereas he's been pretty average.

Cameron always strikes me as someone who has underachieved his potential.

It's the politics he's not very good at. The 2010 election campaign, the 2015 campaign, the management of his own party, his own MPs, the positioning within the EU, selling his mission statement to the general public and triangulating his policy positions to try and demonstrate modernisation, and curry the most votes.

That's why he'll lose. In pure administrative terms, the competence of this government has been quite good - and much better than Labour - particularly on jobs, tax, economy, infrastructure, science, pensions, welfare and education reform.

Success in politics covers two dimensions:
1. The retail side. Getting elected, managing people, aligning factions, driving belief - basically the whole art of shaping opinion and putting yourself in a position to be able to deliver on your beliefs (assuming you have any in the first place); and
2. The managerial side. Delivering well and competently when in power. This means making the country a better place. It does not necessarily mean being able to force through a ruinous agenda.

Blair (and the Labour party generally) excel at 1. But suck harder than the vacuum of deep space at 2.

Dave (and the Tory party generally) are really very good at 2. But suck way more than is acceptable at 1.

Thus Blair and Dave are examples of potentially great but in fact deeply flawed politicians. The true political greats have strength in both dimensions.

NickPalmer said:

Plato said:

I'm telling for the first time today - any advice?

Be nice to everyone - opposing tellers, voters, officials, whoever. It's a relaxing day, you're all working together to make it go smoothly, you can't affect the result.

JosiasJessop said:

Actually, are there any rules about prams and babies/toddlers in polling stations?

The officials decide but you won't have a problem.

I don't think that at this point anything I say will make much difference, so I'll offer a prediction.

LAB 280
CON 271
SNP 50
LD 24
UKIP 2 (Carswell and Farage)
PC 3
GRN 1
SPK 1
NI 18
Total 650

But keep in mind that I only know much about the East Midlands - otherwise I'm just guessing. We expect to take at least half our target seats. In my patch there was what felt like a late shift yesterday to Labour - we were getting people who had told us a month ago that they were probably UKIP (we recanvassed them at the risk of stirring them up because in my patch if they do go and vote UKIP, it won't affect the outcome). But it's possible that Con-UKIP people were going Con, who knows? I do think UKIP will underperform compared with polls, though I reckon name recognition will see Farage home.

Nick good luck today on a personal basis. Wishing that your success is an aberration in the great scheme of things.

FalseFlag said:

JosiasJessop said:

Roger said:

Richard Nabavi

Who knows? To be honest I've not given it much thought, since if, God forbid, we do end up with Ed Miliband in No 10, there will be much more important things to worry about than David Cameron.

In any case his place in history as one of the very best post-war PMs is already assured."

Have you ever thought about doing 'stand-up'?

There is a good chance that history will judge Cameron much better than Brown or Blair, at the very least. Holding together a coalition during the economic crisis was not easy. Blair had it easy with a large majority and will be stained by the wars, whilst Brown will be stained by the economic crash and Labour's tribal infighting, much of which he caused.

Major's reputation seems to have been rehabilitated since he left power. Blair and Brown's have both plummeted. Time will tell which way Cameron's will go: Richard might well be correct.

I can't imagine his foreign policy as being regarded as anything but a complete disaster. Let's hope he resigns sooner rather than later but I doubt he has the integrity.

Yes, he did not follow Putin's every whim.

I can see why you might be upset about that.

Opinium just polled me on a post-voting survey - who did you vote for and why, and what's a legitimate government.