Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Newpaper circulations: The Guardian and Telegraph doing the
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Newpaper circulations: The Guardian and Telegraph doing the best as all papers take a hit
politicalbetting.com is proudly powered by WordPress
with "Neat!" theme. Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS).
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
- House prices ex-London are still substantially below historical levels both absolutely and as a multiple of income. Yes, I think that there is an issue in P / SP London but I am not sure that, absent capital controls, there is much the government can do about this
- Debt is rising: on a government level yes, by definition, but cutting a £120bn deficit in 1 year is not realistic. On a personal level, mortgage debt is still being paid down I believe
- Retail sales are rising: yes. I don't like the consumption driven culture either, but I don't think the government has done much to encourage it in particular
- Trade deficit is rising: I think you are making an error in just focusing on the trade deficit. The UK has a very strong export led services sector and these are an important part of the economy. That is not to ignore the importance of other sectors, such as oil & gas production and manufacturing. Shale gas exploitation should be accelerated, energy costs reduced (by shifting green taxes to general taxation, and active steps to break up the oligopoly that has developed in energy supply - I'd also look very closely at vertical integration, but it's too long since I studied industrial economics to have a strong view). There should be more investment in company-led training, incentives for employing the young, and more emphasis on key segments in the education system.
Fundamentally, the last government left things in a terrible terrible state. Not just the obvious economic points, but also in welfare and, critically, education. This is going to take a generation to undo. Going too fast may shock the system into destruction.
Cameron and Osborne are making a good start, but there is/will be much still to do. If they can fix education, for instance, that will be a huge thing. Welfare implementation is slow but - again - historically an intractable problem (I wish Blair had had the courage to listen to Field). I have a higher regard for Osborne than I do for Cameron, though.
@MrJones, @DavidL
I have searched the internet to find some reference to this concept of
"different goods different velocity of money"
"velocity of money by type of spending"
"discretionary spending velocity of money"
And have been unable to find any kind of reference to the thing that MrJones describes.
Look, I think everybody here can think of ways in which mass immigration might cause deflationary pressures within an economy. However, the transmission mechanism of those pressures will not come through decreased velocity of money.
MrJones, if you want to demonstrate that DavidL and I do not know what we're talking about (and I've been wrong many times, so this would hardly be a first), then please post a link to a reputable economist talking about 'velocity of money by category'.
Thank you.
Thank goodness for the new, fresh online media.
If two bods are having a head-to: Step aside. Too many people interfere - afternoon Neil - without a sane thought to contribute: Why...?
:dont-jump-in-if-eejits-are-about:
Actually, I started it, but I've been out all day, and DavidL stepped into the breach.
Yeah i know. I looked too.
"do not know what we're talking about"
I'm not saying that. The standard idea is as you describe that it's just about spending vs saving. I'm saying on top of that different *categories* of spending will have their own velocities.
To take a different example. During a credit boom discretionary spending is turned into fixed loan repayments. If the velocity of the loan repayment spending category is lower than the velocity of the discretionary spending category then you have a mechanism for the boom bust cycle.
Could you cite some evidence for your claim that London house prices are not at all-time highs?
Will see if I can find a link to the ex-London data.
Quite a turnaround for the Guardian from -10% at the half year point.
Oct 2013 Circulation:
Sun: 2,150,649
Daily Mail: 1,753,489
Daily Mirror: 1,014,439
Daily Telegraph: 549,068
Daily Star: 522,226
Daily Express: 514,217
The Times: 389,379
i: 296,573
FT: 242,873
Guardian: 198,803
Independent: 69,066
Meanwhile:
Express & Star: 113,174
Liverpool Echo: 85,463
Aberdeen Press & Journal: 71,044
Dundee Courier & Advertiser: 61,981
Manchester Evening News: 59,860
I say drop the Independent from the BBC Papers review & put in the Express & Star, Echo and the (in)famous Aberdeen Press & Journal ("Titanic sinks, Aberdeen man gets hair wet...)
I'm assuming all those Al Qaeda affiliates took out bulk subscriptions when they started publishing the Snowden stuff, which offset their normal churn in readers.
::Innocent Face::
The Independent – 16.9 per cent drop = 3,470 to 2,885;
Scottish Daily Mirror – 11.3 per cent drop = 20,928 to 18,573
The Financial Times – 10.7 per cent drop = 2,808 to 2,508;
Daily Star of Scotland – 10.6 per cent drop = 54,320 to 48,572;
Daily Record – 10 per cent drop = 243,726 to 219,390
The Scottish Sun – 10 per cent drop = 284,298 to 255,742;
Scottish Daily Mail – 9 per cent drop = 102,774 to 93,470;
i – 6.3 per cent drop = 19,836 to 18,589;
The Guardian – 6 per cent drop = 11,243 to 10,565;
Scottish Daily Express – 3.6 per cent drop = 56,028 to 54,006;
Daily Telegraph Scotland – 3.2 per cent drop = 19,265 to 18,650;
The Times Scotland – 2.9 per cent drop = 18,814 to 18,269.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/borrowing/mortgages/8747370/House-prices-in-graphs-and-tables.html?image=4
""Perhaps the simplest way for me to suggest why this was relevant is to recall that an essential element of the Keynesian doctrine was the passivity of velocity. If money rose, velocity would decline. Empirically, however, it turns out that the movements of velocity tend to reinforce those of money instead of to offset them. When the quantity of money declined by a third from 1929 to 1933 in the United States, velocity declined also. When the quantity of money rises rapidly in almost any country, velocity also rises rapidly. Far from velocity offsetting the movements of the quantity of money, it reinforces them."
I think that has been vividly proved to be true in the last 8 years. As credit expanded dramatically up to 2008 velocity also increased dramatically in a self fulfilling cycle. The withdrawal of credit after that date has indeed reduced the velocity of money since.
People do tend to underestimate the regional / local press. But I can see why national TV stations focus on the national press.
Note that the P&J and the Courier outsell the Herald and the Scotsman, which in itself speaks volumes about the utterly appalling quality of the Glasgow and Edinburgh publications.
Is that reflected in Newspaper reviews in Scotland?
In England we hear far more about the Independent than papers with nearly double its circulation.....
Take that out and Mon-Fri sales are 166,330 per day.
Anyone fancy taking out BBC sales to make us all laugh?
"Terrific to see the Unionist press taking such a paggering."
Is Paggering a Scottish Rogering?
Mind you, if you have ever actually bought the P&J, the Courier, the Daily Retard, the Scottish Sun or the Adolf Hitler Fanclub Newssheet, you can understand why.
Did the Independent have the most interesting story?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-tayside-central-24803820
I am sure I am not alone in finding the FT paywall access particularly irritating. Just think how many times the Telegraph get "shared" on here by comparison. They need a rethink.
But if politicians worry about 'disengagement', why do they spend their time sitting on sofas reviewing papers people don't read.....?
Clearly paper reviews really, really get to you!
In fact, the Courier is one of very few dead-tree newspapers which I still purchase. My favourite is the Sunday Herald (largely because of the good old-fashioned investigative journalism of Paul Hutcheon), and I might consider the Herald or the Sunday Post (Broons/Oor Wullie), but otherwise the Scottish media market is flooded by toilet paper. Mind you, if you wipe your erse with the Daily Mail you are likely to apply more shit to your bum.
And to repeat my original claim: i was talking about EX-LONDON. i.e. OUTSIDE London. This means NOT INCLUDING London.
Apologies for shouting, but you don't seem to be getting my point.
http://www.theguardian.com/media/2011/nov/11/best-frenemies-politicians-press
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-24853276
Sorry to hear of the death of Helen Eadie MSP (Labour, Cowdenbeath).
She was a veteran of the reconvened parliament, representing Dunfermline East from 1999-2011 and the new Cowdenbeath constituency from 2011.
Her father-in-law was former MP (1966-1992) for Midlothian Alex Eadie. She worked for her father-in-law and Harry Ewing (MP for Stirling/Falkirk/Grangemouth 1971-1992) at Westminster, and was on James Callaghan's general election campaign team. Prior to her election to the Scottish Parliament she was a full-time trade union official for the GMB and a councillor on Fife Council.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helen_Eadie
http://youtu.be/DiF4QI5nIIY
And if you speak French listen to the commentators!
After all, that's what happened with Labour's change to the planning laws that stopped planning permission from lapsing. Hopefully the coalition will change that madness.
There is plenty of valid criticism to be made of the coalition's housing plans. Sadly for you, Labour were much worse.
Pathfinder, anyone?
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/08/jeremy-hunt-17m-hotcourses-sale-inflexion
" To answer just three points as I have to go out.
1) House prices are not substantially below historical levels they are substantially below PEAK levels but substantially ABOVE AVERAGE levels. This makes Osborne's attempts to boost prices - and lets have nobody deny that's what Osborne is trying to do - all the more reprehensible.
2) By trade deficit I mean trade in goods AND SERVICES. Despite the surplus we have on services we still have had a trade deficit in goods and services every single month for over 15 years. As an aside we have also had a permanent tourism deficit which has seen yet more wealth steadily flow from this country.
3) Mortgage debt is not being paid down as I remember from the BoE stats It might be falling in percentage terms but falling from an massively excess amount to a mere heavily excessive amount does not excuse Osborne's mortgage subsidies.
You're right about the terrible state of the country in 2010 but this isn't going to be undone, either in a generation or not, some of the reforms this government has attempted are good and some aren't, some will succees and some will fail. But the fundamental structure this government inherited will not be changed.
Now this discussion has been had many times before and we can have it many times in future.
But we both know that Cameron and Osborne are always going to get a pass mark from you - they're your 'sort of people' - whereas their Labour equivalents will be condemned even when their policies are the same.
What you should be asking is why I am so disillusioned with Cameron and Osborne as I voted Conservative in 2010 and should be supporting them now but their actions have made them worthless in my eyes. "
Well, I only read the Racing Post so I don't suppose I'm a typical newspaper reader either.
The Saturday edition of each is enough to browse for most of the weekend. both have quite interesting review and magazine sections.
Who else reads a newspaper nowadays? My mother reads the Times each day and does the crossword. Only the retired have the time, I expect. It is a bit peculiar that elderly people are so obsessed with the news, and with the decline in British culture, when most of the events would not impact at all on an elderly retired lady.
It is quite clear the artificial boom, powered by rock bottom interest rates, is designed purely and simply to create a "feel good" sense up to and through 2015. It is transparent political mismanagement of the economy such as we saw from Brown, Lawson and others before them.
There is for me an overwhelming argument for interest rates to begin to rise and for normal monetary conditions to return - the economy is growing well and we need that to be sustainable and enduring, not a short-lived boom and bust.
The inevitable post-election sharp rises in rates will do far more damage than a gradual tightening of monetary policy starting now but Osborne needs the mortgage payers and homeowners on side by 2015.
The problem, as Osborne knows, is that the long years of eroding living standards won't be easily forgotten and nor does it help when the wages for many are still struggling while costs are continuing to rise well above inflation.
It's such a great clip. The Welsh anthem sung with such a community of feeling, the surprise of the commentators (I have never heard anything like this), the policemen standing ramrod straight, the open terracing and a crowd of what would largely have been miners, steelworkers etc, and the shape of the players - just normal blokes really. It's a lost world. Over in London I was approaching my 4th birthday.
The Times is the paper that is doing well. They have arrested the very, very steep decline in their circulation figures by not giving their paper away for free. I just wish their website was better.
The Telegraph also seem to benefiting from their paywall despite its ineffectiveness for anyone who decides to Google it for more than a few seconds.
The Guardian also have a problem in the shape of their cash burn rate being too high. Their benefactor will run out of money before they begin to turn a profit at this rate and more assets will have to be sold off in order to continue functioning. It won't be long until Auto Trader goes the way of their stake in Emap/Top Right.
The other interesting part is looking at the Indy, with Lebedev almost bankrupt who will take on a loss making company as a vanity project. I don't think there are many out there.
I just made a point that was specifically relevant to ex-London house prices (i.e. their value relative to their peak value). London prices have clearly performed much more strongly than the rest of the UK.
There is a risk that Help To Buy will put increased pressure on London house prices. Against that you have the risk that given that prices are being pushed up by foreign investment (either directly or indirectly) that "normal people" can't afford to buy in our capital city. That is not healthy (e.g. when I lived near the Phillimore Estate* as a child houses were owned by architects and doctors; when I moved back in about 10 years ago it was bankers and lawyers. Now only hedgies andoligarchs can afford to buy there. Personally I don't think that is healthy in terms of a long term community as many of the properties are rarely occupied).
* Of course I am aware that few people can afford to live on that particular housing estate, but it is the only one that I can provide such detailed long-term perspectives on the residential composition.
It's healthy that people are still willing to take the pay cut to go into public service and face the brickbats of unthinking tribal opponents when it would be more comfortable and more profitable to steer the corporate route.
Your snide comment is a good example of that.
You'll say that they should be doing X or you think that they handled Y badly.
But at the end of the day, when push comes to shove, or any other metaphor you want, you'll fall into line and back them up.
You know it, I know it, everyone knows it.
There's no shortage of people who think similarly about their 'side' or their 'sort of people'.
But I think such a mindset makes it harder for the 'committed' people to understand the 'independent' people.
http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/52740
Does anyone doubt that Osborne would willingly damage the economy long-term to ensure a Conservative victory in 2015 ?
Of course he and his supporters would justify it "we can't let Labour back in, its all for the best in the long run, blah and blah".
But that mentality quickly leads to endless short term tactics with escalating long term damage.
People used to having their every word considered as law can struggle when forced to argue a position or seek approval for a policy.
I've seen the same when business people go into local Government - they don't appreciate that a local authority with elected Councillors isn't the same as a business with shareholders.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/nov/09/david-lammy-first-black-mayor-london-bill-blasio
http://labourlist.org/2013/11/david-lammy-confirms-hes-considering-standing-for-london-mayor-whilst-on-us-trip/
I disagree with them on a number of things.
But when I cast my vote (a) it makes no difference because K&C will elect a Tory and (b) I make my decision based, on balance, who offers the best overall programme.
However, I think that on balance, even if they are not particularly inspiring, I am likely to support Cameron. I agree with a lot of UKIP's underlying thoughts, but I don't rate Farage and I think that a lot of party is in denial about the reality of the modern world/hankers after something that is gone and not coming back. In the past I have been tempted by the LibDems, but have not been impressed by the performance of their left wing in the Coalition. And I don't trust Labour.
Where I would probably be happiest would be an FDP-style party. But that doesn't exist so, on balance, I support the conservatives.
edit: and that has absolutely nothing to do with them being "my sort of people". If anything I more critical of Cameron because of it simply because - with all his advantages and opportunities - he has turned out to be a bit of a doofus
That doesn't make it right.
Any politician seeking re-election has two cards to play - one says "have I done a good job managing the economy ?" and for most people "a good job" means they feel better off, more secure, have more money in their pockets, see their immediate family doing well etc, etc.
The second card is to say "ok, I might not have done well but would the other guy be any better ?". Here Osborne has the advantage in that few people seem to think Ed Balls would have or would do any better. The most effective critique of the Coalition's economic policy is from those who don't think they've gone too far but not far enough.
Mr. Ajob, Lammy was eminently sound regarding the London riots, from memory.
My father was a distribution rep for the paper. He started at the Sketch in the early 60s and eventually ended up for most of his career at the FT. There were about a dozen distribution reps around the country making sure the papers got to the distributors and then on to the newsagents and although it wasn't a very well paid job it was enough for him to be able to buy a plot of land and build his house whilst we lived in a caravan on site in the winter of 69 -70.
The year I got married (1993) one of Dad's colleagues had a bright idea. He went to the management and basically said that if they sacked all the other reps, employed 20 year olds on a fraction of the wage the reps were on and gave him a 50% pay rise he would manage the new recruits and make sure the job got done at a big saving to the paper.
The management accepted the idea and my Dad and his colleagues all got sacked.
I know it was just business and in a way I don't blame the paper but it did for my Dad as he was 50 years old and really had no chance of ever getting another professional position.
So, as I say, not a big fan of the FT.
And mine are hitting.
As the only collateral damage might be to your feelings I'm prepared to live with that ;-)
But I'm interested in your criticism of Cameron - that's a difference between you and Richard Nabavi.
What do you think Cameron should have done differently ? And why do you still have a high opinion of Osborne ?
I wonder where he got that idea from?