As Reggie Perrin's boss CJ used to say " I didn't get where I am today by..." followed by a reasonably fatuous statement.
Well, I didn't get to be the cynical, bitter and twisted person I am today by thinking that anything ever works. I may have thought so once, but not any more.
So a couple of little stories. Mrs. Lear's accountant, filling in her tax return online some weeks ago, discovered there was no way to enter a minus figure. For anything. So a paper form has to be submitted. This then gets followed up by HMRC reducing Mrs. Lear's tax code from about 591 to 16, and when queried we are told - and I quote - " Oh there are thousands that have been sent out in error." I suspect this is probably millions.
When a friend was filling in his form - admittedly at the last minute - it wouldn't work. It kept asking ridiculous follow up questions " Are you a company director? Answer :yes. Up pops : "Put in your Teacher's pension number" I'm not joking. They have spent several billion on this IT system, especially to bring Revenue together with Customs. This particular bit of genius is a forgotten bit of Brown's idiocy which will eventually degrade tax and other levy gathering.
So you can see I have reason to be cynical.
Oh, and sending out all the wrong tax demands? Well that's quite sneaky. When the Pre-Budget report is done, the Treasury can say " X is the amount of tax we have to collect, so the borrowing requirement is Y." Unfortunately, X is complete rubbish, as HMRC makes such a hash of everything that X is probably nearer zero than even half X. So the next time round the borrowing requirement - surprise surprise - has risen. This is why the budget each year for the last 5 has had to admit that the borrowing requirement is higher than the one promulgated 4 months earlier.
So it is with great pleasure that I report on two things that happened this week which have restored my faith in whatever it is.
Firstly, Scottish Power - not noted for their efficiency - spoken to on Wednesday, appointment made for Thursday 10am, hole dug Thursday PM, connection installed by 11:30 Friday morning. Unheard of. I can only think they have nothing to do at the moment as there are little or no new buildings to install power into.
Secondly, my mobile died on Friday morning - not the phone bit, everything else, reducing me to a text that only fitted the outer screen, didn't store any of them, made no record of calls made etc etc. Disaster. Phone call to Orange. Diagnostic over the ether. New phone dispatched and told it would be with me Saturday morning by 10am.
Huge cynicism. Dispelled by ringing of door bell at 9:15am and delivery of new phone.
Now maybe both of these straws in the wind are down to the recession ( and believe me it is, and its still getting worse) with companies desperate to keep their clients.
If so, and to make sure opprobrium will be heaped on me from all angles, recession is a price worth paying to get service.
Of course, the difference is these are both private enterprise companies.
HMRC is not.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Sex in the City
I travelled by train to Edinburgh today to have lunch with the Sheriff. As ever, he was most natilly dressed, sporting a midnight blue coat with matching velvet collar, and a large-brimmed green fedora. It is little wonder that Mrs. Lear holds him up as an example to me - I could look like that, she says, if only I wasn't such a dosser.
Anyway, we made our way from the law courts to a small, grubby Indian restaurant, where self-service curry was the order of the day.
Right next door to it was a sex shop.
" Do you mind walking between me and that shop? Can't get to close to it in my position." Naturally I agreed.
As we passed, a somewhat dowdy middle aged lady emerged from the shop clutching a bag. She spotted the Sheriff and waved at him.
The Sheriff hustled me into the restaurant.
" My next door neighbour," he muttered under his breath
Anyway, we made our way from the law courts to a small, grubby Indian restaurant, where self-service curry was the order of the day.
Right next door to it was a sex shop.
" Do you mind walking between me and that shop? Can't get to close to it in my position." Naturally I agreed.
As we passed, a somewhat dowdy middle aged lady emerged from the shop clutching a bag. She spotted the Sheriff and waved at him.
The Sheriff hustled me into the restaurant.
" My next door neighbour," he muttered under his breath
Celtic 11 Dundee United 10
I don't suppose too many people who read this blog will have noticed the above scoreline from last night's Cup match.
After 120 minutes it was still 0-0.
After 5 penalties each it was 5-5.
After 7 penalties it was 6-6 - both sides missed one.
After 10 penalties it was 9-9
After 11 it was 10-10.
Then a chap who Celtic are trying to buy from DU stepped up and missed.
And Celtic scored. We could hear the roar from Hampden more than 5 miles away.
11-10.
I think the Celts should bung him an extra few quid if they do get him.
PS
They did get him, and he used the proverbial line:" It's a dream come true for me..."
He must have been dreaming when he took that penalty...
After 120 minutes it was still 0-0.
After 5 penalties each it was 5-5.
After 7 penalties it was 6-6 - both sides missed one.
After 10 penalties it was 9-9
After 11 it was 10-10.
Then a chap who Celtic are trying to buy from DU stepped up and missed.
And Celtic scored. We could hear the roar from Hampden more than 5 miles away.
11-10.
I think the Celts should bung him an extra few quid if they do get him.
PS
They did get him, and he used the proverbial line:" It's a dream come true for me..."
He must have been dreaming when he took that penalty...
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
A $100 billion here, a $100billion there....
Just in case you missed it, the US Treasury has raised in 2 days this week,so far,$137,000,000,000. Oh, and they will be selling another $60,000,000,000 or so on Thursday.
That's the UK's entire requirement for next year.
In a week.
Well, 4 days actually.
That's the UK's entire requirement for next year.
In a week.
Well, 4 days actually.
Breaking the Bank
Between all the hoo-ha with Scottish Power, I had two most interesting conversations today. One was with a man who was looking to invest some money in Romania. He started by asking me how much a certain sum might earn over say 5 years. I told him my views. Then he said, well, just give me half now and you can keep the rest.
I explained that I thought he had misunderstood, and the idea was he was to invest money there, not take it out just yet.
" Ah," he said," But I'm only suggesting what the banks have been investing in over the last few years".
His point was that a theoretical payout ( supported by all sorts of graphs, cash flows and other rubbish) was being bought into by the banks in their support for various investors/companies/hedge funds etc, but in reality they were not investing in any real asset. In effect, it was about the same as putting the mortgage payment on red or black at roulette - not breaking the bank but effectively doubling the bets all the time..
For a long time it came up - and then it didn't. If you know your betting, if you start with one chip, lose it, then 2 etc, even if you win at some point, you only win one chip. This, in a simplistic way, is what the Banks did. If at some point you DON'T win, you are out a lot of money. Suppose it loses for say 6 rounds. Then you have lost 1+2+4+8+16+32 =63 chips, but if it then wins on the 7th, you are betting 64. You will win 64 = 1 more than you have lost up to that point. If it loses, you have lost 96. This is what Nick Leeson did for example - and what all the other banks have done too, and why it would appear such gigantic sums of money have been lost.
The other was with someone who has been trying to sell their house since May last year. They had one viewing in June, since then nothing. In December he took £25,000 off the price, reducing it to just below the £500,000 level.
Obviously, over Christmas and New Year there was nothing, but since January 12th he's had 5 viewings.
Interesting.
I explained that I thought he had misunderstood, and the idea was he was to invest money there, not take it out just yet.
" Ah," he said," But I'm only suggesting what the banks have been investing in over the last few years".
His point was that a theoretical payout ( supported by all sorts of graphs, cash flows and other rubbish) was being bought into by the banks in their support for various investors/companies/hedge funds etc, but in reality they were not investing in any real asset. In effect, it was about the same as putting the mortgage payment on red or black at roulette - not breaking the bank but effectively doubling the bets all the time..
For a long time it came up - and then it didn't. If you know your betting, if you start with one chip, lose it, then 2 etc, even if you win at some point, you only win one chip. This, in a simplistic way, is what the Banks did. If at some point you DON'T win, you are out a lot of money. Suppose it loses for say 6 rounds. Then you have lost 1+2+4+8+16+32 =63 chips, but if it then wins on the 7th, you are betting 64. You will win 64 = 1 more than you have lost up to that point. If it loses, you have lost 96. This is what Nick Leeson did for example - and what all the other banks have done too, and why it would appear such gigantic sums of money have been lost.
The other was with someone who has been trying to sell their house since May last year. They had one viewing in June, since then nothing. In December he took £25,000 off the price, reducing it to just below the £500,000 level.
Obviously, over Christmas and New Year there was nothing, but since January 12th he's had 5 viewings.
Interesting.
True Freedom consists in Service* - part 1
What's the difference between service and non-service? You may think this is a strange question, but I assure you it may well be the difference between the UK going bust and making a go of it.
I needed someone in Scottish Power ( or whatever they are nowadays) to send a body out to look at a power cable head and the attendant meter.
I spoke to Scottish Power's main switchboard and was told I needed the reconnection section. I explained I doubted it.
I phoned the reconnection section. They said I needed to speak to customer services.
Customer services said I need emergency call out.
Emergency call out asked if I was a hospital or school, and when they heard I wasn't, said I should talk to new supply.
Sighing, I phoned new supply, who immediately told me I didn't want them I wanted the reconnection section.
I explained I had spoken to them and definitely didn't need reconnecting. So the lady said I should speak to Cardiff ( Cardiff!) and she put me through.
Cardiff wondered where the post code was - was it in Wales? Ah, Scotland, you want customer services in Scottish Power.
Thoroughly fed up, I retraced my steps to customer services and got a different lady, who put me through to reconnection ( again) but reconnection, when I explained I had already spoken to them, and what the problem was, said she had been told a completely different story, and couldn't help.
BUT - and here's the but - she said she would make enquiries and call me back.
By this stage I can only say my spirit was broken and simply getting off the phone made me inclined to thank her profusely. I'd spent more than 4 hours off and on by now.
I had no real faith I would ever hear from Heather again.
Lo and behold, about an hour later my phone rang and it was Heather. She had spoken to a supervisor in the survey section ( the one section no one had suggested) and if I would phone this number and ask for Archie he would see me right.
Wondrous tidings! Not only could Archie help, he would help to such an extent that he scheduled what I required immediately.
My point is this.
We are a services country. Only about 14% of our economy is made up by manufacturing. If we are going to persuade people to buy from us, they need to want to, and we need to give them the right answers to their questions to make them do so.
So well done Heather and Archie. My only question is, what are all the other sections I spoke to doing?
Not a lot by the sound of it.
* It's not a Shakespearean quote, it's the meaning of The Tempest - as long as you don't listen to American academics.
I needed someone in Scottish Power ( or whatever they are nowadays) to send a body out to look at a power cable head and the attendant meter.
I spoke to Scottish Power's main switchboard and was told I needed the reconnection section. I explained I doubted it.
I phoned the reconnection section. They said I needed to speak to customer services.
Customer services said I need emergency call out.
Emergency call out asked if I was a hospital or school, and when they heard I wasn't, said I should talk to new supply.
Sighing, I phoned new supply, who immediately told me I didn't want them I wanted the reconnection section.
I explained I had spoken to them and definitely didn't need reconnecting. So the lady said I should speak to Cardiff ( Cardiff!) and she put me through.
Cardiff wondered where the post code was - was it in Wales? Ah, Scotland, you want customer services in Scottish Power.
Thoroughly fed up, I retraced my steps to customer services and got a different lady, who put me through to reconnection ( again) but reconnection, when I explained I had already spoken to them, and what the problem was, said she had been told a completely different story, and couldn't help.
BUT - and here's the but - she said she would make enquiries and call me back.
By this stage I can only say my spirit was broken and simply getting off the phone made me inclined to thank her profusely. I'd spent more than 4 hours off and on by now.
I had no real faith I would ever hear from Heather again.
Lo and behold, about an hour later my phone rang and it was Heather. She had spoken to a supervisor in the survey section ( the one section no one had suggested) and if I would phone this number and ask for Archie he would see me right.
Wondrous tidings! Not only could Archie help, he would help to such an extent that he scheduled what I required immediately.
My point is this.
We are a services country. Only about 14% of our economy is made up by manufacturing. If we are going to persuade people to buy from us, they need to want to, and we need to give them the right answers to their questions to make them do so.
So well done Heather and Archie. My only question is, what are all the other sections I spoke to doing?
Not a lot by the sound of it.
* It's not a Shakespearean quote, it's the meaning of The Tempest - as long as you don't listen to American academics.
Oh, Please!
OK, I know people probably think of me as a rabid Tory, but I can't have been alone to be appalled at Wright on Newsnight with Paxman last night.
Admittedly he was getting slaughtered, but to try to make Party Political points - and then saying he doesn't want to make them is truly dreadful.
Up to that point I had been thinking that the debate between Wright Pickles and Paxo was sensible and measured ( and I loved Pickles aside: Paxo: You're unusually quiet. Pickles: When I come on this programme I tend to wait until I'm asked a question) - and then Wright starts spouting about Ashcroft and Laidlaw. Paxo quite rightly slapped him down, and Pickles played it brilliantly, not mentioning Party at all, but sticking to the " there must be rules all adhere to" line.
I can't help but think Gordon Brown's inability to see anything except as a chance to score points against the Tories as the real problem we face, not particularly the Credit Crunch. Wright is clearly infected with it, but, interestingly, Alistair Darling seems to have done his best to keep away from it. If Brown really did put country before party we might be out of this a lot quicker.
Footnote:
I received an email from a young friend in Canada today, to whom I had been relating the dire state of UK PLC. His reply? "I'm astonished. We in Canada think of Britain as a strong country with a strong economy and a strong currency. I can't believe how badly your government has handled things."
Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings....
Admittedly he was getting slaughtered, but to try to make Party Political points - and then saying he doesn't want to make them is truly dreadful.
Up to that point I had been thinking that the debate between Wright Pickles and Paxo was sensible and measured ( and I loved Pickles aside: Paxo: You're unusually quiet. Pickles: When I come on this programme I tend to wait until I'm asked a question) - and then Wright starts spouting about Ashcroft and Laidlaw. Paxo quite rightly slapped him down, and Pickles played it brilliantly, not mentioning Party at all, but sticking to the " there must be rules all adhere to" line.
I can't help but think Gordon Brown's inability to see anything except as a chance to score points against the Tories as the real problem we face, not particularly the Credit Crunch. Wright is clearly infected with it, but, interestingly, Alistair Darling seems to have done his best to keep away from it. If Brown really did put country before party we might be out of this a lot quicker.
Footnote:
I received an email from a young friend in Canada today, to whom I had been relating the dire state of UK PLC. His reply? "I'm astonished. We in Canada think of Britain as a strong country with a strong economy and a strong currency. I can't believe how badly your government has handled things."
Out of the mouths of babes and sucklings....
Monday, January 26, 2009
The eyebrows have it
The Speccie has a nice piece suggesting that silver hair and dark eyebrows in a Chancellor is a leading indicator of recession.
Loretto is a good school, but it is noted much more for the foppish hairdos of it's boys, rather than intellectual vigour.
So, as a matter of interest which have been the best chancellors and which schools did they go to?
Update:
I've had lots of emails telling me its a stupid question as the answer is Geoffrey Howe. What he did, of course, is go against all those 364 economists who said he was ruining the country, and all of whom were proved spectacularly wrong. One of them was, of course, one M.King, he of the BofE Governorship.
Worrying isn't it?
Loretto is a good school, but it is noted much more for the foppish hairdos of it's boys, rather than intellectual vigour.
So, as a matter of interest which have been the best chancellors and which schools did they go to?
Update:
I've had lots of emails telling me its a stupid question as the answer is Geoffrey Howe. What he did, of course, is go against all those 364 economists who said he was ruining the country, and all of whom were proved spectacularly wrong. One of them was, of course, one M.King, he of the BofE Governorship.
Worrying isn't it?
No surprise there, then.
I don't use predictive text, as I have a little qwerty keyboard and I'm technologically illiterate.
So I was somewhat surprised the other day when I was informed that if you try to type in "scots" up will come "pants".
I'm not sure how that comes about, and I don't necessarily agree with it.
However, I am assured that typing "fife" - as in where Gordon Brown comes from - up will come " dire"
UPDATE:
Actually, its not " dire" its "died". Same difference.
So I was somewhat surprised the other day when I was informed that if you try to type in "scots" up will come "pants".
I'm not sure how that comes about, and I don't necessarily agree with it.
However, I am assured that typing "fife" - as in where Gordon Brown comes from - up will come " dire"
UPDATE:
Actually, its not " dire" its "died". Same difference.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Lies, damned lies and Brown
Fraser Nelson over at the Speccie has a very good " fisking" of the Evan Davis's interview with Brown this morning.
I can no longer actually watch or listen to Brown as I start throwing things at the TV/radio, and Mrs. Lear objects. Mind you, it may be she would rather I seethe and go beserk so I drop dead with apoplectic rage. Throwing things tends to relieve the pressure...
I did manage to read it, largely by skipping Brown's lies, half truths and non-answers, but the thing that struck me most was the point that in the UK, the real problem lies with the over lending of eg 125% of value. As Fraser says, how many Canadian and Spanish Banks have gone bust?Answer: none. But then, I think I'm right in saying that in Spain there is a statutary maximum of 70% loan to value and 75% in Canada. Look at Nationwide - I think the most its ever done is 85% - and funded mostly with deposits. All the Bank of England had to do ( sorry, it doesn't control this anymore) ...all whoever now has responsibility for Bank oversight ( er... er...) had to do was say no mortgages over 100% . Or 90% or whatever. But they didn't, because Brown and the Treasury loved the illusory profits which they could tax and the Stamp duty - which was all borrowed and hence yet another disaster waiting to happen - which it now has.
Don't forget Spain has building companies crashing all around, but not their banks - they never lent too much on an individual property.
Unless I'm much mistaken, the £2.5billion the Royal Bank lost on some random Russian was not even secured against anything - at least not validly - and certainly whatever it was wasn't worth north of £3.5billion. In fact, it was worth zilch.
Middle Ms Lear says that people are less trusting of doing business with big companies, because they think they might fail, whereas the small, family owned or run business has an extremely good motive for keeping going - if it doesn't, the family doesn't eat.
Perhaps its time to start a small, deposits only bank.. I even have a name for it. We could call it a Savings Bank.
I know... The Trustee Savings Bank.....
I can no longer actually watch or listen to Brown as I start throwing things at the TV/radio, and Mrs. Lear objects. Mind you, it may be she would rather I seethe and go beserk so I drop dead with apoplectic rage. Throwing things tends to relieve the pressure...
I did manage to read it, largely by skipping Brown's lies, half truths and non-answers, but the thing that struck me most was the point that in the UK, the real problem lies with the over lending of eg 125% of value. As Fraser says, how many Canadian and Spanish Banks have gone bust?Answer: none. But then, I think I'm right in saying that in Spain there is a statutary maximum of 70% loan to value and 75% in Canada. Look at Nationwide - I think the most its ever done is 85% - and funded mostly with deposits. All the Bank of England had to do ( sorry, it doesn't control this anymore) ...all whoever now has responsibility for Bank oversight ( er... er...) had to do was say no mortgages over 100% . Or 90% or whatever. But they didn't, because Brown and the Treasury loved the illusory profits which they could tax and the Stamp duty - which was all borrowed and hence yet another disaster waiting to happen - which it now has.
Don't forget Spain has building companies crashing all around, but not their banks - they never lent too much on an individual property.
Unless I'm much mistaken, the £2.5billion the Royal Bank lost on some random Russian was not even secured against anything - at least not validly - and certainly whatever it was wasn't worth north of £3.5billion. In fact, it was worth zilch.
Middle Ms Lear says that people are less trusting of doing business with big companies, because they think they might fail, whereas the small, family owned or run business has an extremely good motive for keeping going - if it doesn't, the family doesn't eat.
Perhaps its time to start a small, deposits only bank.. I even have a name for it. We could call it a Savings Bank.
I know... The Trustee Savings Bank.....
Awwww Bless
This is right up there on a scale of 1 to 10 as an 11 in the " Awwww Bless" category for Oscar winners.
Khran is under 7 and the FA has banned under 8s playing competitive football. Last year, before the ban, he played aged 7 for the under 9s, was the league's top goal scorer and was generally an all round good egg.
This year, because he is not 8 until April, he has to sit out the games.
When asked why he was so upset, his reply was, " 'Cos my best friend plays for them."
Awwwww Blesss!
Khran is under 7 and the FA has banned under 8s playing competitive football. Last year, before the ban, he played aged 7 for the under 9s, was the league's top goal scorer and was generally an all round good egg.
This year, because he is not 8 until April, he has to sit out the games.
When asked why he was so upset, his reply was, " 'Cos my best friend plays for them."
Awwwww Blesss!
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Edukashun
I sometimes pop over to Takis Magazine which has the feel of a proper magazine in many ways and certainly a broad range of articles.Taki himself, half of the famous " High Life/Low Life" duo that included Jeffrey Barnard, posts regularly and his writing always has some merit.
I was taken by this article by one Karen de Coster which finishes as follows:
"For many people, their job is their life because it is something they are “trained” to do. It’s all they have outside of kids, a lawn to cut, and golf on Sundays. For me, my formal education garnered me an established career—a satisfactory and oftentimes challenging occupation that both feeds and funds my passions. If I knew little about the world outside of my job, the one-dimensional life would crush me with boredom and leave me with the life of a trained monkey."
There are many houses I go to where there is no book, no newspaper, no intellectual engagement of any kind, and we as a nation have colluded in the target culture which excludes true understanding and knowledge.
Perhaps the most important part of a University education is the reading around a subject that is done. Today, we can, in many cases, cram or learn by rote what is needed for an A grade, but have neither common-sense nor real understanding.
The result is, I believe, largely to be laid at the door of the present government, which, since 1997, has promulgated the mantra " no one can fail."
Of course they can. And if they do, they should be helped to succeed.
Slightly off subject, the joy on the Little Chef workers' faces as they mastered new skills and saw the results they could achieve made one's heart glow. Jason in particular, who appeared the most unlikely candidate to be able to achieve, made it - and showed his sheer delight.
Surely we should try to do the same for readers, writers and 'rithmeticers.
I was taken by this article by one Karen de Coster which finishes as follows:
"For many people, their job is their life because it is something they are “trained” to do. It’s all they have outside of kids, a lawn to cut, and golf on Sundays. For me, my formal education garnered me an established career—a satisfactory and oftentimes challenging occupation that both feeds and funds my passions. If I knew little about the world outside of my job, the one-dimensional life would crush me with boredom and leave me with the life of a trained monkey."
There are many houses I go to where there is no book, no newspaper, no intellectual engagement of any kind, and we as a nation have colluded in the target culture which excludes true understanding and knowledge.
Perhaps the most important part of a University education is the reading around a subject that is done. Today, we can, in many cases, cram or learn by rote what is needed for an A grade, but have neither common-sense nor real understanding.
The result is, I believe, largely to be laid at the door of the present government, which, since 1997, has promulgated the mantra " no one can fail."
Of course they can. And if they do, they should be helped to succeed.
Slightly off subject, the joy on the Little Chef workers' faces as they mastered new skills and saw the results they could achieve made one's heart glow. Jason in particular, who appeared the most unlikely candidate to be able to achieve, made it - and showed his sheer delight.
Surely we should try to do the same for readers, writers and 'rithmeticers.
Popham Little Chef
You probably know that Hesto had a huge success with his re-menued Little Chef in Popham, just off the A303.
Word is the food is simply fantastic, and worth the 500 mile drive for people in Scotland to go there, despite what a Mirror man might say.
Middle Ms. Lear even texted me to ask when we were going.
That may be a relevant question as it is on a 3 month trial to see if it can make a profit - it hadn't after two weeks, but then, the word would take some time to spread.
So - sometime in the future - I will report back.
PS
Youngest Ms Lear wants to come too....
Word is the food is simply fantastic, and worth the 500 mile drive for people in Scotland to go there, despite what a Mirror man might say.
Middle Ms. Lear even texted me to ask when we were going.
That may be a relevant question as it is on a 3 month trial to see if it can make a profit - it hadn't after two weeks, but then, the word would take some time to spread.
So - sometime in the future - I will report back.
PS
Youngest Ms Lear wants to come too....
Legal?
I know this might be a bit, well, nit-picking, but if President Obama had to take the Oath of Office again (NB without hand on Bible) does that mean that his first executive acts ( eg stopping trials at Guantanamo) were ultra vires?
I only arst*, as Bernard Breslaw would have said.
* Attempt at rendering "asked" in BB's voice.
I only arst*, as Bernard Breslaw would have said.
* Attempt at rendering "asked" in BB's voice.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Sex follows the money?
You may have seen various articles over the past few days purporting to "prove" that women have more orgasms with rich men than poor men.
I'm not especially convinced by the arguments, particularly as I received the following email :
" I'm not sure if I believe this.
Either my boyfriend is NOT lying to me ( i.e. he says he is poor) in which case we are proof that it is wrong
Or he IS lying to me , in which case -WOW! I hope he doesn't lose his money"
I think she means she is enjoying it
I'm not especially convinced by the arguments, particularly as I received the following email :
" I'm not sure if I believe this.
Either my boyfriend is NOT lying to me ( i.e. he says he is poor) in which case we are proof that it is wrong
Or he IS lying to me , in which case -WOW! I hope he doesn't lose his money"
I think she means she is enjoying it
The Bulldog Spirit
Stephen Fry told a rather nice anecdote on QI this evening.
Apparently during the 50's, when Churchill was Prime Minister, he was woken by his PPS.
" Prime Minister, I'm sorry to waken you, but we have a bit of a scandal brewing"
Fry impersonated Churchill's gruff delivery perfectly.
" What is it?"
Well, Prime Minister, I'm a afraid a Tory MP was caught with a Guardsman in St. James Park by the Police."
Churchill thought for a moment.
" Was it not exceptionally cold last night?"
" Indeed, Prime Minister, it was the coldest February night on record."
Another slight pause.
" Makes one proud to be British."
At which point he turned over and went back to sleep.
Apparently during the 50's, when Churchill was Prime Minister, he was woken by his PPS.
" Prime Minister, I'm sorry to waken you, but we have a bit of a scandal brewing"
Fry impersonated Churchill's gruff delivery perfectly.
" What is it?"
Well, Prime Minister, I'm a afraid a Tory MP was caught with a Guardsman in St. James Park by the Police."
Churchill thought for a moment.
" Was it not exceptionally cold last night?"
" Indeed, Prime Minister, it was the coldest February night on record."
Another slight pause.
" Makes one proud to be British."
At which point he turned over and went back to sleep.
Sage advice.
I think I've mentioned this before on here, but many years ago when I did my first deal, my elderly and kindly Bank Manager, after listening to what I had to say ( and no I didn't provide a meaningless cash flow or business plan) said,
" Aye, well, I'll give you the money but remember this: it's not your money, it's not my money, it's not even the Bank's money. It belongs to all the people who deposit money with us, and I'm relying on you to repay them."
If only...
" Aye, well, I'll give you the money but remember this: it's not your money, it's not my money, it's not even the Bank's money. It belongs to all the people who deposit money with us, and I'm relying on you to repay them."
If only...
Hesto and Little Chef.
I've been most interested in the programme at 9pm most nights this week on Channel 4 as Heston Blumenthal ( he and Gordon Ramsey are the only 3 star Michelin chefs in the UK - and Gordon has, I think, a total of ten, greedy bugger) tries to turn around Little Chef.
Charles Forte made Little Chef one of the cornerstones of his empire, the cash cow that made everything possible. I always thought Gerry Robinson's taunt that Forte were " Motorway service station operators" in rather poor taste, and certainly not true for the Grosvenor. I was sad to see the Cafe Royal closing. Clearly lots of other people thought so too as the sale in the last few days of the contents ( including the famous boxing ring for under £500) realised prices hugely over the estimates
My memory as a young lad of Little Chef was of an excellent place to stop for breakfast, or a gammon steak, with chips and peas. No fancy stuff. Menu was half a page. And it was cheap.
I think the decline began under Robinson and Charlie Allan, the latter not someone I personally ever rated very highly. All the new fancy stuff did was confuse people about what they were going in for. Interestingly, there was a recent article about London Restaurants trying to be all things to all men, and consequently not doing a very good job of any of it.
Ignoring for a moment that the non-breakfast food nowadays is almost inedible ( and the coffee is certainly undrinkable), more than 50% of what Little Chef serves is still breakfast.
So I was somewhat surprised that Hesto hadn't attacked this area to start with. It would seem to me he was trying to reinvent the wheel, when simply giving it a wipe would help.
Last night he did just that and the sales of breakfast in the trial outlet soared. If he manages to do the same with the rest of the menu, things really will turn around.
I'm not sure who brought Hesto on board to get things moving, but I doubt very much it was the CEO of the company. He appeared to me to have less idea about catering than I do. He had learned all the management speak ( " Blue sky thinking.... pushing the envelope... " yech!) but certainly had no ability to manage the company seating so that it wasn't either broken or the stuffing spilling out.
Little Chef clearly inspires enormous loyalty both in customers and its staff - no one interviewed had been there less than 7 years and many had 13,17 or 25 years under their belts.
People talk of chicken tikka masala being the Britain's favourite dish, but ask any foreigner what meal they remember in Britain and it will always be the Great British Breakfast.
With baked beans of course.
Charles Forte made Little Chef one of the cornerstones of his empire, the cash cow that made everything possible. I always thought Gerry Robinson's taunt that Forte were " Motorway service station operators" in rather poor taste, and certainly not true for the Grosvenor. I was sad to see the Cafe Royal closing. Clearly lots of other people thought so too as the sale in the last few days of the contents ( including the famous boxing ring for under £500) realised prices hugely over the estimates
My memory as a young lad of Little Chef was of an excellent place to stop for breakfast, or a gammon steak, with chips and peas. No fancy stuff. Menu was half a page. And it was cheap.
I think the decline began under Robinson and Charlie Allan, the latter not someone I personally ever rated very highly. All the new fancy stuff did was confuse people about what they were going in for. Interestingly, there was a recent article about London Restaurants trying to be all things to all men, and consequently not doing a very good job of any of it.
Ignoring for a moment that the non-breakfast food nowadays is almost inedible ( and the coffee is certainly undrinkable), more than 50% of what Little Chef serves is still breakfast.
So I was somewhat surprised that Hesto hadn't attacked this area to start with. It would seem to me he was trying to reinvent the wheel, when simply giving it a wipe would help.
Last night he did just that and the sales of breakfast in the trial outlet soared. If he manages to do the same with the rest of the menu, things really will turn around.
I'm not sure who brought Hesto on board to get things moving, but I doubt very much it was the CEO of the company. He appeared to me to have less idea about catering than I do. He had learned all the management speak ( " Blue sky thinking.... pushing the envelope... " yech!) but certainly had no ability to manage the company seating so that it wasn't either broken or the stuffing spilling out.
Little Chef clearly inspires enormous loyalty both in customers and its staff - no one interviewed had been there less than 7 years and many had 13,17 or 25 years under their belts.
People talk of chicken tikka masala being the Britain's favourite dish, but ask any foreigner what meal they remember in Britain and it will always be the Great British Breakfast.
With baked beans of course.
Bad Bank/Good Bank.
Willem Buiter has an exceptionally fine blog post , which fisnished as follows:
"The balance sheets of the British banks are too large and the quality of the assets they hold too uncertain/dodgy, for the British government to be able to continue its current policy of extending its guarantees to ever-growing shares of the banks’ liabilities and assets, without this impairing the solvency of the sovereign. Britain risks becoming a victim of the new inconsistent quartet: (1) a small open economy with (2) a large internationally exposed banking sector, (3) a currency that is not a serious global reserve currency and (4) limited fiscal capacity. It risks a triple crisis and a threefold run: on its banks, on its currency and on its sovereign debt.
Limiting the exposure of the sovereign to what is fiscally sustainable may imply giving up on saving (all of) the banks. If my proposal for institutionally and legally separating existing stocks of assets and liabilities from new flows of credit and lending is acted upon, the flow of new lending and the supply of new credit need not require the survival of all (or indeed any) banks hitherto deemed systemically important.
I look forward to the time when I will be blogging on the best way of privatising the banks again, under new regulatory and governance regimes."
In essence, he argues that the government guarantee for the existing banks is, in effect, counter-productive.The guarantees should only be available for new lending, and the toxic assets should either be sold off for what they will fetch, with a government controlled "bad" bank amongst the bidders, or the banks completely nationalised and the toxic assets transferred for £1. After all, in this latter scenario, it makes no difference to the government's situation. At least at that point the true value of these assets would be established, the losses taken - and quite probably some of the purchasers will made undreamt of fortunes from the toxic and moribund assets.
But the system would be purged, and proper saving & investing, borrowing & lending could start again.
It certainly isn't as yet.
"The balance sheets of the British banks are too large and the quality of the assets they hold too uncertain/dodgy, for the British government to be able to continue its current policy of extending its guarantees to ever-growing shares of the banks’ liabilities and assets, without this impairing the solvency of the sovereign. Britain risks becoming a victim of the new inconsistent quartet: (1) a small open economy with (2) a large internationally exposed banking sector, (3) a currency that is not a serious global reserve currency and (4) limited fiscal capacity. It risks a triple crisis and a threefold run: on its banks, on its currency and on its sovereign debt.
Limiting the exposure of the sovereign to what is fiscally sustainable may imply giving up on saving (all of) the banks. If my proposal for institutionally and legally separating existing stocks of assets and liabilities from new flows of credit and lending is acted upon, the flow of new lending and the supply of new credit need not require the survival of all (or indeed any) banks hitherto deemed systemically important.
I look forward to the time when I will be blogging on the best way of privatising the banks again, under new regulatory and governance regimes."
In essence, he argues that the government guarantee for the existing banks is, in effect, counter-productive.The guarantees should only be available for new lending, and the toxic assets should either be sold off for what they will fetch, with a government controlled "bad" bank amongst the bidders, or the banks completely nationalised and the toxic assets transferred for £1. After all, in this latter scenario, it makes no difference to the government's situation. At least at that point the true value of these assets would be established, the losses taken - and quite probably some of the purchasers will made undreamt of fortunes from the toxic and moribund assets.
But the system would be purged, and proper saving & investing, borrowing & lending could start again.
It certainly isn't as yet.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
No words to describe it...
Fraser Nelson in the Spectator "Coffee House" has this to say:.
" I wish I could find a way of getting across, in plain, non-hyperbolic English, the sheer scale of what's going on right now, and what this means to our country's ability to finance itself. I just can't: the size of our problems defies my powers of expression. Journalistic language can't do it justice: we cried doom months ago, and we were right. Crying "double doom" now wont resonate. "
The whole post is worth reading, but what is particularly telling, I think, is the fact that things keep getting worse. In previous downturns ( certainly since WW2) things slowly declined but then levelled off. After a period, things began to improve - and people could see where it was all heading. Now, no one appears to have any idea where we are heading or what to do about it if we did.
Seriously scary.
" I wish I could find a way of getting across, in plain, non-hyperbolic English, the sheer scale of what's going on right now, and what this means to our country's ability to finance itself. I just can't: the size of our problems defies my powers of expression. Journalistic language can't do it justice: we cried doom months ago, and we were right. Crying "double doom" now wont resonate. "
The whole post is worth reading, but what is particularly telling, I think, is the fact that things keep getting worse. In previous downturns ( certainly since WW2) things slowly declined but then levelled off. After a period, things began to improve - and people could see where it was all heading. Now, no one appears to have any idea where we are heading or what to do about it if we did.
Seriously scary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)