Politics
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
They are losing ground everywhere, and farage is a the biggest c unt walking the planet. Why??
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 35
|
By:
Read the room, immigration out of control, taxes about to rise again, cost of living out of control, government spending out of control. Not hard is it?
|
|
By:
Is there much money in market? They could probably fling a cryptocurrency million into market to keep profile high.
I could make myself the next Celtic manager fav, doesn’t mean I have any chance of getting the job. Common sense will prevail reform won’t win. Although they will be constant nuisance in UK, for the foreseeable future. |
|
By:
The establishment can't protect Barnum forever. I believe he is due to locate the HoC next week.
It's pretty interesting to me, they must have thought they would have done much better, as obviously it's his high tide mark, and it's not very high is it. No matter what grenade or anyone else might like to claim, the pretence that the tories are relevant again is pure gaslighting. He must be pretty susceptible :) |
|
By:
The time decay is a factor in long term markets in the same way time decay = money in options markets.
Thus typically the favourite's odds in such markets comprise of the true odds plus the amount added for time decay. E.G. in this market labour's true odds are circa 2.0 plus 0.75 for the 2 year time decay, giving market odds of 2.75 Inversely, all the non favourites odds are comprised the true odds MINUS the time decay that the layers need to account for in their odds. E.G. Reforms True odds are circa 5.00 minus 1.5 for the layers time decay giving market odds of 3.5 |
|
By:
Absolutely no idea what you are trying to make out there, but it's hogwash.
This market doesn't know when the election will be. Thus it factors in Labour potentially going early (his high tide mark, as above). When Sunak went earlier than he needed to, the Tories drifted immediately. As the market thought he couldn't be that stupid (before he was). Pretty obvious that it's the other way around for Labour, earlier the better. But it's about 50% chance as they will lose a lot of seats, and quite possibly the election. The longer he leaves it, the worse it will be for his first election. There are no variables that are going to improve in the short term. Absolutely none. Which is why he is either talking about 40 years ago or 10 years into the future (or gerrymandering). |
|
By:
Cider you stated there that you have no idea what a poster put up, but you know it’s hogwash.
That doesn’t sound to clever to myself and possibly many more. |
|
By:
Happens in loads of markets
Next Tottenham manager was great example with trappatoni. Not enough cash to knock the price out to where it should be, so mad gambler can keep them short with a few squids. |
|
By:
Fairly obvious I'd say. The explanation doesn't make any sense, but even if it did, it's wrong. How can there be a specific 'time decay' when there is no fixed date for an election (just a limit).
The true odds are what the market is trading at, and the market knows that the election could be earlier or later. In my view that is factored into the true odds. |
|
By:
That's the reality of it, and reality doesn't change just because you don't understand it.
Obviously my point was the odds in long term markets comprise true odds and time decay odds. For the purposes of simplification, I didn't mention other factors which also contribute to each runners odds like the uncertainty of the time of the event. The Time=Money formula in options markets is widely calculated by using VIX & Time (VIX = Volatility Index). There is no explicit VIX to refer to in long term betting markets so time decay is more of an art for betting markets than the science it is for options. Reality doesn't care if you don't understand what is going on and why. |
|
By:
Time decay is a factor of date of next election market, the market manipulator
fails to manipulate the side markets so it's easier to spot his work. |
|
By:
Right, so when I laid greens at 5, what was the 'time decay' factor?
|
|
By:
Currently 2.04, 2029 or later
|
|
By:
Let’s go back to basics lads
Cider doesn’t understand what somebody says, he stated that not myself , but he knows it’s hogwash. That’s facts. |
|
By:
|
|
By:
It depends how long you hold your lay of greens at 5. Hold it to term, 2029 and collect the lot, or trade out when you're
satisfied. Starmer going allowed green layers to get out early for a good profit, but the profit doesn't get paid until the next election is determined, or 1 Jan 2029 arrives. |
|
By:
Needs to be a full investigation into Burnham and the Man City owners , seems Burnham doesn't care who is Providing money
|
|
By:
Too busy investigating farrages sleazy
cash, half of the party under investigation. |
|
By:
Cider doesn’t understand what somebody says, he stated that not myself , but he knows it’s hogwash.
lol, don't embarrass yourself. It's a 100% market, it will always be a 100% market. There is no erosion through time. In the investing world, the time value of money must be considered as it erodes the value of investments in the base currency (through inflation). Now this is a teeny tiny factor in British politics betting. Obviously nobody is going to put funds into, for example, a 1.05 shot for three years as in real terms, the return would be negative. But at this point in this market, I'd say 95%+ of bets matched are trades. So the real time value is virtually irrelevant. |
|
By:
I think Burnham is Everton fan, the football authorities have investigated Man City, decision has been reached, it appears they will appeal, let’s see what happens and penalties, don’t think Burnham should have any role in that.
There not charged with tax evasion by football authorities. |
|
By:
It's not a 100%
3 years off and no "any other" And any of these parties could split and a fragment could win most seats Backing 1.25 shots over 4 years ain't great tactics, unless for a trade, but not getting a trade is expensive. Mad manipulator can be your friend, but hes got a big pot and doesn't care how much he spends to keep prices where he wants them. |
|
By:
MALAY 09 Oct 26 13:45
I think Burnham is Everton fan, the football authorities have investigated Man City, decision has been reached, it appears they will appeal, let’s see what happens and penalties, don’t think Burnham should have any role in that. ........................... You'd think not, so why was he leaping to their defence. Have Abu Dhabi got anything on him, for leverage. |
|
By:
They say a week is a long time in politics so how long is 3 years (potentially to the next election). Who know's what will come out over the coming months/years as there appears to be a lot of skeletons yet to be uncovered.
|
|
By:
Saddo I don’t think he will have any influence on Man City future and he definitely should not have, for avoidance of doubt I believe Man City should be hammered but I think we all know they have huge legal resources.
I don’t believe Burnham has any influence on Football authorities perhaps Prince William does, he’s chairman of FA. It’s obviously a difficult situation for football authorities on how they decide the extent of punishment because unless it’s specific in their rules, it becomes subjective and the Man City legal resources will be all over this case. My opinion owner should be banned and relegation and no parachute payment. How far they should be relegated is either in rules or not ? I don’t know never read the document if it even exists. Obviously there is potential for other clubs to sue them for loss of cash perhaps even individual players. Who knows ? |
|
By:
Surely the allegations are about local corruption, not the actual sporting outcomes.
|
|
By:
If 'Manchesterism' is actually about bucket loads of cash changing hands for favours (or more).
|
|
By:
Obviously Burnham has connections to man city, and man utd, and their owners developments in Manchester as he was mayor.
The clubs are major assets to the area... Are/were/still will be, whatever. |
|
By:
Regarding the “document “ I referred to, I think that will be revised and it will clear what the penalties are for how much financial fiddling and need to be signed by owners, you are responsible not some guy employed.
Eg Billion pound fiddle: the club is gone no way back |
|
By:
Oddly enough I seem to recall allegations of major corruption in Liverpool council, and the 'unite' union.
|
|
By:
The Serious Fraud Office is investigating the construction of a hotel and conference centre owned by one of the UK’s biggest trade unions.
Unite the Union spent a total of £112m of its members’ money on the project in Birmingham. The building has since been valued at just £29m, suggesting £83m has been wasted. A KC-led inquiry commissioned by Unite’s general secretary Sharon Graham also identified a missing £14m which has been described as a “mystery” and does not feature in the project’s final accounts. Unite has told the BBC the case is “now with the Serious Fraud Office” and Ms Graham, who took over as Unite general secretary in 2021, would “leave no stone unturned in finding out if there was any financial wrongdoing”. |
|
By:
The alleged council corruption trial of former mayor of Liverpool Joe Anderson and ex-politician Derek Hatton has been put back by six months.
The pair, along with three others, were due to stand trial in October next year but at a hearing at Manchester Crown Court, a judge ordered the trial to now go ahead on 5 April 2027. Mr Anderson, 67, who was the city's elected mayor from 2012 to 2021, is charged with bribery, misconduct in a public office and conspiracy to commit misconduct in a public office. The defendants were charged as part of Operation Aloft, launched by Merseyside Police to look into the awarding of commercial and business contracts from the council between 2010 and 2020. Mr Hatton, of Aigburth, Liverpool, who was deputy council leader, is accused of offering a bribe. The 77-year-old is also charged with counselling or procuring misconduct in a public office. lol |
|
By:
no wonder he wants even more devolution
|
|
By:
Refuk supporter complaining about financial misconduct.
Lol |
|
By:
If grenade is angry over Farage, the above stuff must be making him explode.
|
|
By:
Burnham knew exactly what he was doing by announcing he wanted to undo Brext.
That drove the Brexit supporters firmly into Farage's arms leaving the Tories languishing in 3rd place. Hence Kemi's madness this week. |
|
By:
AFAIK, Most of this Burnham-Man City thing is because the mega rich billionaire arabs that own city threw a hissy fit when told City would suffer consequences for cheating.
They doubled down and issued a formal threat at a high diplomatic level to withdraw from other £Billions investments in the UK. It fell to burnham to get involved and diplomatically explain that open corruption, (trying to buy off sanctions against city) was illegal in UK and so he couldn't comply with their wishes in exchange for favours. |