QuicheFontaine
Member
On this page Theonik / Crab are Royal Mail
Huw is Consignia
Huw is Consignia
On this page Theonik / Crab are Royal Mail
Huw is Consignia
There's only you on this page, Quiche.
Crab would list Royal Mail for 50ppp, quiche and most the rest of the thread would for 100ppp. How many pages has Crab lost the taxpayer on this sale?There's only you on this page, Quiche.
There's only you on this page, Quiche.
Crab would list Royal Mail for 50ppp, quiche and most the rest of the thread would for 100ppp. How many pages has Crab lost the taxpayer on this sale?
If they'd said they'd issue the shares at 800p, and they didn't manage to sell all of them, then they can sell a second tranche at 720p, and nothing has been lost except time.
If they issue the shares at 560p, and people buy them when they would have bought them at 720p, what's been lost is an enormous amount of revenue.
You're justifying the massive undervaluing by saying 'they just wanted to make sure a sale occurred!' when the consequences of no-sale (small wait, try again at lower price) are inconsequential compared to the consequences of undervaluing.
Your justification sucks.
Trick question! 50ppp users get more pages, not less!Crab would list Royal Mail for 50ppp, quiche and most the rest of the thread would for 100ppp. How many pages has Crab lost the taxpayer on this sale?
Actually can we get into that? Is it actually as sleazy as it sounds or is there more to the story?And that's before we even get onto the sleaze of letting the companies who advised on the initial share price buy said shares and rely on a "gentleman's agreement" not to use them for short term profits.
But we are trying to cut the number of pages we use! It's that newfangled Australiaty and whatnot. We are trying to be responsible. The country's credit card depends on it.Trick question! 50ppp users get more pages, not less!
We must focus on the important things. People that use 50 ppp are despicable, yes. Foul, indeed. Wretched, most certainly.
They are, however, a minor nuisance compared to those who do not hide Avatars. All hate must be directed towards them.
We must focus on the important things. People that use 50 ppp are despicable, yes. Foul, indeed. Wretched, most certainly.
They are, however, a minor nuisance compared to those who do not hide Avatars. All hate must be directed towards them.
If you think everyone ought to hide avatars, why do you have an avatar? There's no need to make concessions to the immoral.
That's like saying that the reason the Tories are appalling when in government is because they are trying to demonstrate that government doesn't work.Guess why my avatars tend to lean towards the grotesque.
That's like saying that the reason the Tories are appalling when in government is because they are trying to demonstrate that government doesn't work.
That's like saying that the reason the Tories are appalling when in government is because they are trying to demonstrate that government doesn't work.
Brütalmake no mistake, i'd rent my avatar space to the highest bidder too if i could find anyone interested in the damn thing.
But it's the will of the British people.Certainly true of UKIP MEPs in Brussels.
make no mistake, i'd rent my avatar space to the highest bidder too if i could find anyone interested in the damn thing.
I will pay you2 units of NeoGAF karmaa pint to change it to a picture of Michael Gove.
What, really, does Cable get the Dems in terms of voter share.
He's economically aligned with the Tories, doesn't have anything distinctive like Farrons (for once entirely correct) view on legalising the 'erb. He's a no sell to students/appears to dislike young people entirely.
Who is his appointment meant to appeal to? I'll not complain if he strips seats from the coalition of chaos mind you.
This is what the lib dems felt after they saw RM stock trading at twice the price they listed them.That's cheating, you managed to find the least-bad picture of Gove. Half-pint at best.
Moderate Tories I guess? The more the Tories capitulate to the hard Brexiteers and DM reading nutjobs the more it makes sense for the Lib Dems to eat their moderate lunch.What, really, does Cable get the Dems in terms of voter share.
He's economically aligned with the Tories, doesn't have anything distinctive like Farrons (for once entirely correct) view on legalising the 'erb. He's a no sell to students/appears to dislike young people entirely.
Who is his appointment meant to appeal to? I'll not complain if he strips seats from the coalition of chaos mind you.
What, really, does Cable get the Dems in terms of voter share.
He's economically aligned with the Tories, doesn't have anything distinctive like Farrons (for once entirely correct) view on legalising the 'erb. He's a no sell to students/appears to dislike young people entirely.
Who is his appointment meant to appeal to? I'll not complain if he strips seats from the coalition of chaos mind you.
My Mum likes Vince Cable but she's a Remain-voting baby boomer, not exactly a huge target demographic
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FatHLHG2uGYThe Tories heard that us Yorkshire folk walk 5 miles to work uphill both ways and are bloody grateful. Trains? Electricity? In my day we'd get a lump of coal for Christmas and have to make it last the whole year!
Which just gave me a thought. This is a massively South East based government / cabinet. Off the top of my head I can only think of David Davies in the cabinet (aside from Welsh / Scottish Secretaries of State) who represents a constituency outside of South East England.
I seriously want someone to explain to my why it makes sense to press ahead with £30bn Crossrail 2 but the country can't afford basic electrification schemes in the regions.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jul/24/transport-secretary-backs-crossrail-2-plan
I partly agree with you there. Decent transportation links are the foremost factor that can be attributed to being able to earn more than one's parents. So why were you for cutting off most of the countryside again?Uhhhhh guys, train lines that run through London aren't there to benefit London. They're there to benefit the other areas the line goes through, because they're able to get to the part of the country which actually has jobs that pay more than £14kpa and restaurants that aren't whatever exciting combination of Burger King, KFC, M&S Food and Starbucks your local service station has. Ok, so Crossrail is all in the South East and, therefore, serves only cunts but HS2 is an attempt to rescue some poor souls from their monotonous lives of scarcity and allow them to see an electric light bulb at least *once* before they die.
Good shit and unlike the benefits emergency legislation getting rid of money owed labour won't fold.So apparently Employment Tribunal fees have been ruled as unlawful, in part because they indirectly discriminate against women:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-40727400
I partly agree with you there. Decent transportation links are the foremost factor that can be attributed to being able to earn more than one's parents. So why were you for cutting off most of the countryside again?
So what's your opinion of the Beeching Axe?Who's cutting anyone off? It's not electrified now, is it?
The Manchester Victoria line between Leeds and Manchester is horrendous. Carriages from like the 70s, always over loaded. Glad I don't commute on the line anymore.The Tories heard that us Yorkshire folk walk 5 miles to work uphill both ways and are bloody grateful. Trains? Electricity? In my day we'd get a lump of coal for Christmas and have to make it last the whole year!
Or more seriously, the Tory leadership remembered it was Osborne's idea and want to destroy his legacy at all costs.
They've already cut down the trees next to my line to make room for overhead cables. Destroying this noise barrier is okay because electric trains will be so much quieter. Ooops...
True story: I was once in an amateur league football team that was ironically called Transpennine Express because we were old, shit and every game there'd be a couple of people that never bothered to show up.
The line is in desperate need of improvements. Jokes aside, Leeds, Liverpool, Sheffield and Manchester are important cities and need good transport links, plus all the smaller cities on the route, like Bradford, York and Hull. This isn't some fucking branch line that can make do with some shitty 3-carriage diesels.
We still have 80's "Pacer" trains for most Northern Rail services in my area. They are literally converted buses meant for temporary use.
What, really, does Cable get the Dems in terms of voter share.
He's economically aligned with the Tories, doesn't have anything distinctive like Farrons (for once entirely correct) view on legalising the 'erb. He's a no sell to students/appears to dislike young people entirely.
Who is his appointment meant to appeal to? I'll not complain if he strips seats from the coalition of chaos mind you.
Moving the thread backwards a little, anecdotally at least, it seems that Cable will help the Lib Dems swing Tory voters (who make up over 40% of the electorate, remember). Young people are a lost cause until Labour betray them next, and then it's probably the Green Party's turn with them after that anyway.
Cable exudes competence and economic credibility. Most politicians aren't judged on their record, but on their perception - and on this perception alone, Cable could win a good percentage of the base that Cameron went for. Neither the Conservatives nor Labour look economically competent right now, Cable fills that niche.
Over 80% of Lib Dem target seats are blue right now, they need to swing blue voters to win back those seats.
Also important is Cable's ability to appear apolitical and gain air time. Farron always struggled to get any media attention, and then when he got it, it was largely (unduly) negative. Cable hasn't had this problem so far.