Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With 60 days to go the uncertainty is greater than ever

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited January 28 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » With 60 days to go the uncertainty is greater than ever

Betdata.io

Read the full story here


«13456

Comments

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784
    First like the Leave vote.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784
    I still think we leave on time, as an extension requires unanimity from the EU27 side. Even if it's 50/50 the value remains on the Leave side of the bet.

    A short extension to allow for the passing of legislation might be approved, but only if it's clear that the deal has passed and there's a clear Parliamentary majority for everything that needs to happen - which I don't think there is.

    A longer extension, past the EU elections, gives more problems from their side, so they would need to see a good reason for it other than just more talking. Remember that the clock is a feature as far as the EU is concerned, it's not in their interest to keep it running. They want to see the issue forced quickly so that we either leave with the deal or don't leave, to allow them to get on with other important things.

    Only the serious possibility of no deal is going to focus their minds. Also remember that between April 23rd and July 2nd the EU Parliament is not sitting, and they need to approve the same deal after it's been approved by the EU negotiators and the UK Parliament.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784
    edited January 28
    FPT
    AndyJS said:

    "Patisserie Valerie, which opened its first café in Soho in central London in 1926, called in the administrators. “This is a company that may have been built on sand all along and no one got wind of it,” said Gavin Pearson, a forensic accountant at Quantuma.

    Unlike many of its rivals in the casual dining business, Patisserie Valerie was reporting a rise in sales each year and an ever-growing pile of cash."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/lid-is-lifted-on-40m-black-hole-at-heart-of-patisserie-valerie-x70p3c0vp

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 10,957
    Sandpit said:

    I still think we leave on time, as an extension requires unanimity from the EU27 side. Even if it's 50/50 the value remains on the Leave side of the bet.

    A short extension to allow for the passing of legislation might be approved, but only if it's clear that the deal has passed and there's a clear Parliamentary majority for everything that needs to happen - which I don't think there is.

    A longer extension, past the EU elections, gives more problems from their side, so they would need to see a good reason for it other than just more talking. Remember that the clock is a feature as far as the EU is concerned, it's not in their interest to keep it running. They want to see the issue forced quickly so that we either leave with the deal or don't leave, to allow them to get on with other important things.

    Only the serious possibility of no deal is going to focus their minds. Also remember that between April 23rd and July 2nd the EU Parliament is not sitting, and they need to approve the same deal after it's been approved by the EU negotiators and the UK Parliament.

    Counterpoint:
    1) The EU never saw a can it didn't kick.
    2) "No extension for faffing" makes sense as a stance for as long as it's focussing minds, but everybody would prefer further faffing to a car crash.
    3) It's true that the need for unanimity adds a non-trivial risk of somebody sabotaging things, but a car crash is bad for everyone, including businesses and citizens in every member state, and the Council of Ministers has strong peer pressure in crisis situations in a way that wouldn't apply if there were parliaments involved.
    4) No non-bonkers person wants Brexit to happen, and every day it doesn't happen increases the chances that it won't happen.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,877
    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    "Patisserie Valerie, which opened its first café in Soho in central London in 1926, called in the administrators. “This is a company that may have been built on sand all along and no one got wind of it,” said Gavin Pearson, a forensic accountant at Quantuma.

    Unlike many of its rivals in the casual dining business, Patisserie Valerie was reporting a rise in sales each year and an ever-growing pile of cash."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/lid-is-lifted-on-40m-black-hole-at-heart-of-patisserie-valerie-x70p3c0vp

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 24,661

    Sandpit said:

    I still think we leave on time, as an extension requires unanimity from the EU27 side. Even if it's 50/50 the value remains on the Leave side of the bet.

    A short extension to allow for the passing of legislation might be approved, but only if it's clear that the deal has passed and there's a clear Parliamentary majority for everything that needs to happen - which I don't think there is.

    A longer extension, past the EU elections, gives more problems from their side, so they would need to see a good reason for it other than just more talking. Remember that the clock is a feature as far as the EU is concerned, it's not in their interest to keep it running. They want to see the issue forced quickly so that we either leave with the deal or don't leave, to allow them to get on with other important things.

    Only the serious possibility of no deal is going to focus their minds. Also remember that between April 23rd and July 2nd the EU Parliament is not sitting, and they need to approve the same deal after it's been approved by the EU negotiators and the UK Parliament.

    Counterpoint:
    1) The EU never saw a can it didn't kick.
    2) "No extension for faffing" makes sense as a stance for as long as it's focussing minds, but everybody would prefer further faffing to a car crash.
    3) It's true that the need for unanimity adds a non-trivial risk of somebody sabotaging things, but a car crash is bad for everyone, including businesses and citizens in every member state, and the Council of Ministers has strong peer pressure in crisis situations in a way that wouldn't apply if there were parliaments involved.
    4) No non-bonkers person wants Brexit to happen, and every day it doesn't happen increases the chances that it won't happen.
    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,877
    edited January 28

    Sandpit said:

    I still think we leave on time, as an extension requires unanimity from the EU27 side. Even if it's 50/50 the value remains on the Leave side of the bet.

    A short extension to allow for the passing of legislation might be approved, but only if it's clear that the deal has passed and there's a clear Parliamentary majority for everything that needs to happen - which I don't think there is.

    A longer extension, past the EU elections, gives more problems from their side, so they would need to see a good reason for it other than just more talking. Remember that the clock is a feature as far as the EU is concerned, it's not in their interest to keep it running. They want to see the issue forced quickly so that we either leave with the deal or don't leave, to allow them to get on with other important things.

    Only the serious possibility of no deal is going to focus their minds. Also remember that between April 23rd and July 2nd the EU Parliament is not sitting, and they need to approve the same deal after it's been approved by the EU negotiators and the UK Parliament.

    Counterpoint:
    1) The EU never saw a can it didn't kick.
    2) "No extension for faffing" makes sense as a stance for as long as it's focussing minds, but everybody would prefer further faffing to a car crash.
    3) It's true that the need for unanimity adds a non-trivial risk of somebody sabotaging things, but a car crash is bad for everyone, including businesses and citizens in every member state, and the Council of Ministers has strong peer pressure in crisis situations in a way that wouldn't apply if there were parliaments involved.
    4) No non-bonkers person wants Brexit to happen, and every day it doesn't happen increases the chances that it won't happen.
    Despite a lot of noise, we are actually no further forward than we were in December:

    May has a deal nobody likes.
    Corbyn is still committed to a deal that’s not on offer.
    Nobody wants a No Deal, but nobody has a deal that can command a majority in Parliament.

    May has successful wasted 6 weeks.
    There are only 8 weeks to go.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784

    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    "Patisserie Valerie, which opened its first café in Soho in central London in 1926, called in the administrators. “This is a company that may have been built on sand all along and no one got wind of it,” said Gavin Pearson, a forensic accountant at Quantuma.

    Unlike many of its rivals in the casual dining business, Patisserie Valerie was reporting a rise in sales each year and an ever-growing pile of cash."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/lid-is-lifted-on-40m-black-hole-at-heart-of-patisserie-valerie-x70p3c0vp

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.
    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 10,957

    Sandpit said:

    I still think we leave on time, as an extension requires unanimity from the EU27 side. Even if it's 50/50 the value remains on the Leave side of the bet.

    A short extension to allow for the passing of legislation might be approved, but only if it's clear that the deal has passed and there's a clear Parliamentary majority for everything that needs to happen - which I don't think there is.

    A longer extension, past the EU elections, gives more problems from their side, so they would need to see a good reason for it other than just more talking. Remember that the clock is a feature as far as the EU is concerned, it's not in their interest to keep it running. They want to see the issue forced quickly so that we either leave with the deal or don't leave, to allow them to get on with other important things.

    Only the serious possibility of no deal is going to focus their minds. Also remember that between April 23rd and July 2nd the EU Parliament is not sitting, and they need to approve the same deal after it's been approved by the EU negotiators and the UK Parliament.

    Counterpoint:
    1) The EU never saw a can it didn't kick.
    2) "No extension for faffing" makes sense as a stance for as long as it's focussing minds, but everybody would prefer further faffing to a car crash.
    3) It's true that the need for unanimity adds a non-trivial risk of somebody sabotaging things, but a car crash is bad for everyone, including businesses and citizens in every member state, and the Council of Ministers has strong peer pressure in crisis situations in a way that wouldn't apply if there were parliaments involved.
    4) No non-bonkers person wants Brexit to happen, and every day it doesn't happen increases the chances that it won't happen.
    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    I'm talking about Prime Ministers and things, I'm not talking about the voters, as they don't have a veto.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 3,373



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 17,993
    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    A poster who was all gammon and spinach...
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,995
    edited January 28
    You still wonder whether two years ago when any question about Brexit was silenced by being told it would give our negotiating position away whether it was said in good faith by people who didn't know any better or whether it was a deliberate con perpetrated by a government to disguise the fact they had no idea what they were doing?

    Either way the cost to the country has been incalculable.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 24,661

    Despite a lot of noise, we are actually no further forward than we were in December:

    May has a deal nobody likes.
    Corbyn is still committed to a deal that’s not on offer.
    Nobody wants a No Deal, but nobody has a deal that can command a majority in Parliament.

    May has successful wasted 6 weeks.
    There are only 8 weeks to go.

    We are further forward, in that:

    - the Cabinet Remainers STILL haven't resigned - they REALLY like their Ministerial perks
    - the Irish are finally having some domestic discussions about the reality of Hard Borders - and are shit-scared about it (from "bonkers" Prime Minister down)
    - ERG members are admitting that a form of May's Deal is the only Brexit they are going to get (Nadine Dories right acoss, Rees-Mogg moved partly across publically - and many others will have privately got to that point)
    - we are very close to seeing that May's Deal with the backstop removed would give us a deal that would get through the House --> Hard Brexit belong EU
    - a number of EU countries are at least wondering aloud if their negotiators position is really in their collective interest
    - the Remainers have now played their hand that Remaining is all they are interested in - and centuries of Parliamentary convention and independence of the Speaker's Chair are worth throwing out to achive that
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 23,039
    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    "Patisserie Valerie, which opened its first café in Soho in central London in 1926, called in the administrators. “This is a company that may have been built on sand all along and no one got wind of it,” said Gavin Pearson, a forensic accountant at Quantuma.

    Unlike many of its rivals in the casual dining business, Patisserie Valerie was reporting a rise in sales each year and an ever-growing pile of cash."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/lid-is-lifted-on-40m-black-hole-at-heart-of-patisserie-valerie-x70p3c0vp

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
    There was a story that there were multiple people - internal and external - involved
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 24,661
    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    And yet, the collective efforts of the Remainers and the EU are acting as excellent recruiting sergeants for more Leavers to join the ranks.....
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 23,039
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    "Patisserie Valerie, which opened its first café in Soho in central London in 1926, called in the administrators. “This is a company that may have been built on sand all along and no one got wind of it,” said Gavin Pearson, a forensic accountant at Quantuma.

    Unlike many of its rivals in the casual dining business, Patisserie Valerie was reporting a rise in sales each year and an ever-growing pile of cash."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/lid-is-lifted-on-40m-black-hole-at-heart-of-patisserie-valerie-x70p3c0vp

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.
    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,877
    Roger said:

    You still wonder whether two years ago when any question about Brexit was silenced by being told it would give our negotiating position away whether it was said in good faith by people who didn't know any better or whether it was a deliberate con perpetrated by a government to disguise the fact they had no idea what they were doing?

    Either way the cost to the country has been incalculable.

    Do you really need to ask the question?
    The government had no plan and no agreement. They spread a number of falsehoods to cover this up.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,877

    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    And yet, the collective efforts of the Remainers and the EU are acting as excellent recruiting sergeants for more Leavers to join the ranks.....
    There’s no evidence for this. Quite the reverse.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 24,661

    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    And yet, the collective efforts of the Remainers and the EU are acting as excellent recruiting sergeants for more Leavers to join the ranks.....
    There’s no evidence for this. Quite the reverse.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6635785/DAN-HODGES-die-hard-Remainer-arrogant-MPs-hard-Brexiteer.html

    You think he's alone?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 17,993
    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,877

    Despite a lot of noise, we are actually no further forward than we were in December:

    May has a deal nobody likes.
    Corbyn is still committed to a deal that’s not on offer.
    Nobody wants a No Deal, but nobody has a deal that can command a majority in Parliament.

    May has successful wasted 6 weeks.
    There are only 8 weeks to go.

    We are further forward, in that:

    - the Cabinet Remainers STILL haven't resigned - they REALLY like their Ministerial perks
    - the Irish are finally having some domestic discussions about the reality of Hard Borders - and are shit-scared about it (from "bonkers" Prime Minister down)
    - ERG members are admitting that a form of May's Deal is the only Brexit they are going to get (Nadine Dories right acoss, Rees-Mogg moved partly across publically - and many others will have privately got to that point)
    - we are very close to seeing that May's Deal with the backstop removed would give us a deal that would get through the House --> Hard Brexit belong EU
    - a number of EU countries are at least wondering aloud if their negotiators position is really in their collective interest
    - the Remainers have now played their hand that Remaining is all they are interested in - and centuries of Parliamentary convention and independence of the Speaker's Chair are worth throwing out to achive that
    Ireland and the EU are not budging on the substance of the backstop. The “wondering aloud” you refer to is actually one or two remarks from gadflies representing countries nobody listens to like Poland.

    The “centuries of Parliamentary convention” is really guff upon guff.

    Nothing has changed.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,877

    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    And yet, the collective efforts of the Remainers and the EU are acting as excellent recruiting sergeants for more Leavers to join the ranks.....
    There’s no evidence for this. Quite the reverse.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6635785/DAN-HODGES-die-hard-Remainer-arrogant-MPs-hard-Brexiteer.html

    You think he's alone?
    Wait, wait.
    You cite Hodges?
    HODGES?

    Give over. He’s writing tripe for an audience that craves tripe.
  • GardenwalkerGardenwalker Posts: 3,877
    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 17,993

    Despite a lot of noise, we are actually no further forward than we were in December:

    May has a deal nobody likes.
    Corbyn is still committed to a deal that’s not on offer.
    Nobody wants a No Deal, but nobody has a deal that can command a majority in Parliament.

    May has successful wasted 6 weeks.
    There are only 8 weeks to go.

    We are further forward, in that:

    - the Cabinet Remainers STILL haven't resigned - they REALLY like their Ministerial perks
    - the Irish are finally having some domestic discussions about the reality of Hard Borders - and are shit-scared about it (from "bonkers" Prime Minister down)
    - ERG members are admitting that a form of May's Deal is the only Brexit they are going to get (Nadine Dories right acoss, Rees-Mogg moved partly across publically - and many others will have privately got to that point)
    - we are very close to seeing that May's Deal with the backstop removed would give us a deal that would get through the House --> Hard Brexit belong EU
    - a number of EU countries are at least wondering aloud if their negotiators position is really in their collective interest
    - the Remainers have now played their hand that Remaining is all they are interested in - and centuries of Parliamentary convention and independence of the Speaker's Chair are worth throwing out to achive that
    Ireland and the EU are not budging on the substance of the backstop. The “wondering aloud” you refer to is actually one or two remarks from gadflies representing countries nobody listens to like Poland.
    That isn't quite correct, although the noises are confusing, contradictory and incoherent. This is a good summary from the Emerald Isle itself:

    https://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/cliff-taylor-ireland-could-face-choice-of-backstop-concessions-or-no-deal-brexit-1.3770820?mode=amp
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 17,993

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She would be using the threat of Revoke instead?
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 10,957

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 3,373
    May ruling out N O D E A L would almost certainly mean it's now Plan A.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784
    edited January 28
    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.
    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    While accountants in private companies might massage the figures slightly with things like valuations of leases and intangibles, the books at PV seem to bear no relationship to the true figures, with debt facilities and overdrafts apparently missing completely.

    I think it was your good self who said on here that audit is the next big scandal coming down the line, and this is undoubtedly a future textbook example of what happens when those who you are paying to be critical and cynical don't fulfill that role effectively - but still feel able to charge top rates for their services. Dare I suggest that the same might also be said of the non-executive directors, whom the shareholders might expect to be asking the right questions rather than simply assuming things are great?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 17,993

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784
    Is that Mike quoting The Sun as a reliable source?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 10,759
    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.
    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    While accountants in a lot of private companies might massage the figures slightly with things like valuations of leases and intangibles, the books at PV seem to bear no relationship to the true figures, with debt facilities and overdrafts apparently missing completely.

    I think it was your good self who said on here that audit is the next big scandal coming down the line, and this is undoubtedly a future textbook example of what happens when those who you are paying to be critical and cynical don't fulfill that role effectively - but still feel able to charge top rates for their services. Dare I suggest that the same might also be said of the non-executive directors, whom the shareholders might expect to be asking the right questions rather than simply assuming things are great?
    Is there perhaps a widespread failing in the business world generally for the past couple of decades that the awkward squad who might have asked inconvenient questions have been let go as "not team players"?
  • eekeek Posts: 3,433
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 17,993
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    Difficult to judge. May might have been toppled before signing the deal if Parliament had not been able to have a say, for instance.

    But certainly nobody can credibly say No Deal is not an option if they have failed to vote for a course of action that would avoid it.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 24,661

    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    And yet, the collective efforts of the Remainers and the EU are acting as excellent recruiting sergeants for more Leavers to join the ranks.....
    There’s no evidence for this. Quite the reverse.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6635785/DAN-HODGES-die-hard-Remainer-arrogant-MPs-hard-Brexiteer.html

    You think he's alone?
    Wait, wait.
    You cite Hodges?
    HODGES?

    Give over. He’s writing tripe for an audience that craves tripe.
    Hodges STILL has the ability to rile Lefties I see....

    ...but in future I won't bother offering up evidence that contradicts your cast-iron certainties.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 3,851

    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    And yet, the collective efforts of the Remainers and the EU are acting as excellent recruiting sergeants for more Leavers to join the ranks.....
    There’s no evidence for this. Quite the reverse.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6635785/DAN-HODGES-die-hard-Remainer-arrogant-MPs-hard-Brexiteer.html

    You think he's alone?
    I am pretty sure he is.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 3,851
    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    We've all known all along that any setbacks would be blamed on the remainers by the leavers.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 3,851

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    I think you'll find she can.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 17,993

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    We've all known all along that any setbacks would be blamed on the remainers by the leavers.
    That's not entirely true. At least half will be blamed on the EU, with some justice.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 3,851

    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    And yet, the collective efforts of the Remainers and the EU are acting as excellent recruiting sergeants for more Leavers to join the ranks.....
    There’s no evidence for this. Quite the reverse.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6635785/DAN-HODGES-die-hard-Remainer-arrogant-MPs-hard-Brexiteer.html

    You think he's alone?
    Wait, wait.
    You cite Hodges?
    HODGES?

    Give over. He’s writing tripe for an audience that craves tripe.
    Hodges STILL has the ability to rile Lefties I see....

    ...but in future I won't bother offering up evidence that contradicts your cast-iron certainties.
    Hodges does not constitute evidence.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203

    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    And yet, the collective efforts of the Remainers and the EU are acting as excellent recruiting sergeants for more Leavers to join the ranks.....
    There’s no evidence for this. Quite the reverse.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6635785/DAN-HODGES-die-hard-Remainer-arrogant-MPs-hard-Brexiteer.html

    You think he's alone?

    It’s almost as if people can change their minds, isn’t it? I wonder if there’s a way to find out if this is the case.

  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 14,730
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    We've all known all along that any setbacks would be blamed on the remainers by the leavers.
    That's not entirely true. At least half will be blamed on the EU, with some justice.
    a) The EU Commission would, so far as I can see, very, very much rather we didn't Leave.
    b) However if we do, they must, and will do their duty by the remaining members.

    It is after all, we, the British, who have upset the applecart and who don't seem to know how or even why.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 24,661

    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    And yet, the collective efforts of the Remainers and the EU are acting as excellent recruiting sergeants for more Leavers to join the ranks.....
    There’s no evidence for this. Quite the reverse.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6635785/DAN-HODGES-die-hard-Remainer-arrogant-MPs-hard-Brexiteer.html

    You think he's alone?

    It’s almost as if people can change their minds, isn’t it? I wonder if there’s a way to find out if this is the case.

    Opinion polls.

    But....meh...margin of error.......
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.

    May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    We've all known all along that any setbacks would be blamed on the remainers by the leavers.
    That's not entirely true. At least half will be blamed on the EU, with some justice.

    So Brussels will get blamed. Then what?

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,345

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    We've all known all along that any setbacks would be blamed on the remainers by the leavers.
    That's not entirely true. At least half will be blamed on the EU, with some justice.

    So Brussels will get blamed. Then what?

    life will go on, people will go to work, schools will be open and PB will continue its rantfest

    next ?
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 17,993
    In other news:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-47023665

    I don't think this will work. Bluntly, £5000 wouldn't make up the salary gap they're talking about, and as a one off in most parts of the country it wouldn't even help towards buying a house.

    Until workload is brought under control pay is so much irrelevance. This could actually be done very easily. A cheap start could be made by abolishing OFSTED, OFQUAL and whatever the DfE is called this week, all of which perform their tasks extraordinarily badly and do nothing except annoy actual experts by pontificating loudly about subjects they understand about as well as Corbyn does the Brexit negotiations.

    However, the next stage is cutting class sizes and that's so costly no government will ever do it.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 17,993

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.

    May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.
    So name an alternative plan.

    Even if you don't like what's on offer, she's got a deal. Nobody else has a clue.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203
    I’ll ask what

    Despite a lot of noise, we are actually no further forward than we were in December:

    May has a deal nobody likes.
    Corbyn is still committed to a deal that’s not on offer.
    Nobody wants a No Deal, but nobody has a deal that can command a majority in Parliament.

    May has successful wasted 6 weeks.
    There are only 8 weeks to go.

    We are further forward, in that:

    - the Cabinet Remainers STILL haven't resigned - they REALLY like their Ministerial perks
    - the Irish are finally having some domestic discussions about the reality of Hard Borders - and are shit-scared about it (from "bonkers" Prime Minister down)
    - ERG members are admitting that a form of May's Deal is the only Brexit they are going to get (Nadine Dories right acoss, Rees-Mogg moved partly across publically - and many others will have privately got to that point)
    - we are very close to seeing that May's Deal with the backstop removed would give us a deal that would get through the House --> Hard Brexit belong EU
    - a number of EU countries are at least wondering aloud if their negotiators position is really in their collective interest
    - the Remainers have now played their hand that Remaining is all they are interested in - and centuries of Parliamentary convention and independence of the Speaker's Chair are worth throwing out to achive that

    I’ll ask what I asked yesterday. When we leave without a deal on 30th March and nothing changes on the Irish border - which we all know is what will happen - how does that actually help the UK cope with No Deal?
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 23,039

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    I suspect she said something like “I will do everything to avoid no deal” and they heard what they wanted to
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 17,993
    edited January 28

    schools will be open

    You sure? If they closed for a bit it would be one possible positive!

    Speaking of which - time for work. Have a good morning.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 17,267
    edited January 28
    'Tis really no more than what she told big business way back at the outset.

    No PM could allow no deal, in any case. It would make Suez look like a minor misjudgement.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 11,373
    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:



    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.

    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    Reading up on the details, it’s astonishing that no one involved in the business but not involved in the fraud didn’t ask some basic questions. The markings were better than Starbucks, with no dip in margins or profits per store in any year as the business grew. Simply not credible.

    Even less so, had anyone is senior management bothered to visit a couple of their outlets. I had the misfortune to go into their Stratford on Avon unit a couple of years back. Almost deserted - in one of the busiest tourist towns in England - and the food offering was worse that the average motorway service station.
    And it was obvious that very, very little money had been spent on fitting it out.

    Had I been a shareholder, I would have sold immediately.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203
    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.

    May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.
    So name an alternative plan.

    Even if you don't like what's on offer, she's got a deal. Nobody else has a clue.

    Given where we are her deal is the only option. I am happy to accept that. But we are where we are largely thanks to decisions she has made.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,345
    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:



    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.

    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    Reading up on the details, it’s astonishing that no one involved in the business but not involved in the fraud didn’t ask some basic questions. The markings were better than Starbucks, with no dip in margins or profits per store in any year as the business grew. Simply not credible.

    Even less so, had anyone is senior management bothered to visit a couple of their outlets. I had the misfortune to go into their Stratford on Avon unit a couple of years back. Almost deserted - in one of the busiest tourist towns in England - and the food offering was worse that the average motorway service station.
    And it was obvious that very, very little money had been spent on fitting it out.

    Had I been a shareholder, I would have sold immediately.

    so you knew PatVal was underperforming and did nothing about it ? You are clearly complicit in this whole scandal.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,345
    edited January 28

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.

    May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.
    So name an alternative plan.

    Even if you don't like what's on offer, she's got a deal. Nobody else has a clue.

    Given where we are her deal is the only option. I am happy to accept that. But we are where we are largely thanks to decisions she has made.

    thats what happens in politics, If you dont like it vote against her.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203
    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:



    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.

    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    Reading up on the details, it’s astonishing that no one involved in the business but not involved in the fraud didn’t ask some basic questions. The markings were better than Starbucks, with no dip in margins or profits per store in any year as the business grew. Simply not credible.

    Even less so, had anyone is senior management bothered to visit a couple of their outlets. I had the misfortune to go into their Stratford on Avon unit a couple of years back. Almost deserted - in one of the busiest tourist towns in England - and the food offering was worse that the average motorway service station.
    And it was obvious that very, very little money had been spent on fitting it out.

    Had I been a shareholder, I would have sold immediately.


    Boards work back from EBITDA, profit and revenue, don’t they? If they’re all looking good they are unlikely to ask too many questions.
  • eekeek Posts: 3,433
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    We've all known all along that any setbacks would be blamed on the remainers by the leavers.
    That's not entirely true. At least half will be blamed on the EU, with some justice.
    At least 1 will be blaming the MPs stupid enough to vote to invoke Article 50 and then refusing to vote for anything that stops No Deal while protesting that they don't want it.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,345
    Nigelb said:
    his tax audit should be fun
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.

    May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.
    So name an alternative plan.

    Even if you don't like what's on offer, she's got a deal. Nobody else has a clue.

    Given where we are her deal is the only option. I am happy to accept that. But we are where we are largely thanks to decisions she has made.

    thats what happens in politics, If you dont like it vote against her.

    She’s not my MP. If she was I would.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.

    May refused to be honest with the electorate about Brexit’s reality, May decided not to include Remain voters in her plans, May never sought Commons consensus, May drew those red lines. May appointed a series of cretinous, clueless Brexiteers to key cabinet positions. I think she has to get a teeny bit of blame for where we are now.
    So name an alternative plan.

    Even if you don't like what's on offer, she's got a deal. Nobody else has a clue.

    Given where we are her deal is the only option. I am happy to accept that. But we are where we are largely thanks to decisions she has made.

    thats what happens in politics, If you dont like it vote against her.

    She’s not my MP. If she was I would.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 23,039
    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.
    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    While accountants in private companies might massage the figures slightly with things like valuations of leases and intangibles, the books at PV seem to bear no relationship to the true figures, with debt facilities and overdrafts apparently missing completely.

    I think it was your good self who said on here that audit is the next big scandal coming down the line, and this is undoubtedly a future textbook example of what happens when those who you are paying to be critical and cynical don't fulfill that role effectively - but still feel able to charge top rates for their services. Dare I suggest that the same might also be said of the non-executive directors, whom the shareholders might expect to be asking the right questions rather than simply assuming things are great?
    NED positions are difficult. I enjoy them because I am still learning but in the main they are a lot of personal risk for not much money
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 27,331
    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    Difficult to judge. May might have been toppled before signing the deal if Parliament had not been able to have a say, for instance.

    But certainly nobody can credibly say No Deal is not an option if they have failed to vote for a course of action that would avoid it.
    What most MP's want is a plan that (a) stops Brexit (b) avoids their having to take responsibility for doing so, and that 's the ultimate unicorn
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,345
    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.
    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    While accountants in private companies might massage the figures slightly with things like valuations of leases and intangibles, the books at PV seem to bear no relationship to the true figures, with debt facilities and overdrafts apparently missing completely.

    I think it was your good self who said on here that audit is the next big scandal coming down the line, and this is undoubtedly a future textbook example of what happens when those who you are paying to be critical and cynical don't fulfill that role effectively - but still feel able to charge top rates for their services. Dare I suggest that the same might also be said of the non-executive directors, whom the shareholders might expect to be asking the right questions rather than simply assuming things are great?
    NED positions are difficult. I enjoy them because I am still learning but in the main they are a lot of personal risk for not much money
    as the saying goes youre overpaid when things are running well and when things turn bad they cant pay you enough
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 49,057
    Good morning, everyone.

    Only about three weeks until testing commences. Huzzah!
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784

    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    Reading up on the details, it’s astonishing that no one involved in the business but not involved in the fraud didn’t ask some basic questions. The markings were better than Starbucks, with no dip in margins or profits per store in any year as the business grew. Simply not credible.

    Even less so, had anyone is senior management bothered to visit a couple of their outlets. I had the misfortune to go into their Stratford on Avon unit a couple of years back. Almost deserted - in one of the busiest tourist towns in England - and the food offering was worse that the average motorway service station.
    And it was obvious that very, very little money had been spent on fitting it out.

    Had I been a shareholder, I would have sold immediately.

    Boards work back from EBITDA, profit and revenue, don’t they? If they’re all looking good they are unlikely to ask too many questions.
    It's going to be really interesting to find out at what point the numbers started to look dodgy.

    The Restaurant manager would look at figures like REVPASH (revenue per available seat hour), and the regional manager would look at this as well as an EBITDA figure for the site. His boss would look at EBITDA plus the missing ITDA, plus profits for head office activities like HR, marketing and IT - and so on up the chain. Even the ops director would want to know the top performing sites on the REVPASH figures, as they'd be used for things like staff bonus schemes. Such basic information comes straight from the point of sale systems, rather than on spreadsheets.

    Someone somewhere must have realised that the figures their boss had were very different to the figures coming up the chain, or else there was a whole level of higher-ups keeping two sets of books.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 11,477
    Good grief why can’t she just get on and do it? She might recover some good will from this endless politicking.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    While accountants in private companies might massage the figures slightly with things like valuations of leases and intangibles, the books at PV seem to bear no relationship to the true figures, with debt facilities and overdrafts apparently missing completely.

    I think it was your good self who said on here that audit is the next big scandal coming down the line, and this is undoubtedly a future textbook example of what happens when those who you are paying to be critical and cynical don't fulfill that role effectively - but still feel able to charge top rates for their services. Dare I suggest that the same might also be said of the non-executive directors, whom the shareholders might expect to be asking the right questions rather than simply assuming things are great?
    NED positions are difficult. I enjoy them because I am still learning but in the main they are a lot of personal risk for not much money
    as the saying goes youre overpaid when things are running well and when things turn bad they cant pay you enough
    Indeed, same as professions like airline pilots. They earn their money on the non-normal days!

    The difference being that NEDs don't die if they screw up. In fact, many of them just shrug it off and move on to the next well paid NED somewhere else.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 10,524
    Not like she's ever lied about anything in the past...
  • SquareRootSquareRoot Posts: 6,500
    tlg86 said:

    Not like she's ever lied about anything in the past...
    When it comes to terminological inexactitudes, step forward the Hon LOTO>...
  • RogerRoger Posts: 10,995
    edited January 28
    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    "Patisserie Valerie, which opened its first café in Soho in central London in 1926, called in the administrators. “This is a company that may have been built on sand all along and no one got wind of it,” said Gavin Pearson, a forensic accountant at Quantuma.

    Unlike many of its rivals in the casual dining business, Patisserie Valerie was reporting a rise in sales each year and an ever-growing pile of cash."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/lid-is-lifted-on-40m-black-hole-at-heart-of-patisserie-valerie-x70p3c0vp

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
    My flat in Soho was twenty yards from the original Patisserie Valerie on Old Compton Street It had eight to ten seater tables with a large bowl of croissants in the centre. You shared tables and helped yourself to the croissants while the long serving Spanish waitress brought your coffee at her own pace..

    It was always full of film people and it was much the best and most famous coffee bar in town. It was the place for early morning meetings and a place to read your paper, It sold pastries at the front of the shop but the tables were coffee and croissants only. It later opened an upstairs doing English breakfasts but it was the dark wood lined interior with a wall sized Lautrec that made it the first port of call even for out of towners.

    I can only imagine one of my fellow early morning croissant eaters saw the potential in the brand and decided to run with it. If it's true that he's a Brexiteer it's ironic. It was the most cosmopolitan cafe in the most cosmopolitan district in London. Perhaps going bust is Soho's revenge?
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203
    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    Reading up on the details, it’s astonishing that no one involved in the business but not involved in the fraud didn’t ask some basic questions. The markings were better than Starbucks, with no dip in margins or profits per store in any year as the business grew. Simply not credible.

    Even less so, had anyone is senior management bothered to visit a couple of their outlets. I had the misfortune to go into their Stratford on Avon unit a couple of years back. Almost deserted - in one of the busiest tourist towns in England - and the food offering was worse that the average motorway service station.
    And it was obvious that very, very little money had been spent on fitting it out.

    Had I been a shareholder, I would have sold immediately.

    Boards work back from EBITDA, profit and revenue, don’t they? If they’re all looking good they are unlikely to ask too many questions.
    It's going to be really interesting to find out at what point the numbers started to look dodgy.

    The Restaurant manager would look at figures like REVPASH (revenue per available seat hour), and the regional manager would look at this as well as an EBITDA figure for the site. His boss would look at EBITDA plus the missing ITDA, plus profits for head office activities like HR, marketing and IT - and so on up the chain. Even the ops director would want to know the top performing sites on the REVPASH figures, as they'd be used for things like staff bonus schemes. Such basic information comes straight from the point of sale systems, rather than on spreadsheets.

    Someone somewhere must have realised that the figures their boss had were very different to the figures coming up the chain, or else there was a whole level of higher-ups keeping two sets of books.

    Yep - at the very least it indicates an entirely dysfunctional company culture. The board has to take responsibility for that.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,496
    Good Morning Britain reporting today that Theresa May has privately told Ministers she is going to rule out a No Deal Brexit
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    We've all known all along that any setbacks would be blamed on the remainers by the leavers.
    That's not entirely true. At least half will be blamed on the EU, with some justice.

    So Brussels will get blamed. Then what?

    life will go on, people will go to work, schools will be open and PB will continue its rantfest

    next ?

    Not everyone has our very comfortable lives, unfortunately.

  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,496
    Good Morning Britain reporting this today.

    A reflection of the Parliamentary arithmetic given if Parliament does not vote for the Deal a second time it will almost certainly vote for a permanent Customs Union instead to avoid No Deal and given Juncker's statement over the weekend the EU could renegotiate with a permanent Customs Union that would then become the new Deal by default
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 49,057
    F1: just a rumour, but Twitter suggestion Ecclestone might try and buy F1 back from Liberty.

    Sounds bonkers. Doesn't mean it's not true, of course.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 29,203
    HYUFD said:

    Good Morning Britain reporting today that Theresa May has privately told Ministers she is going to rule out a No Deal Brexit

    And as we all know, her word is her bond!!

  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 11,477

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    We've all known all along that any setbacks would be blamed on the remainers by the leavers.
    That's not entirely true. At least half will be blamed on the EU, with some justice.

    So Brussels will get blamed. Then what?

    life will go on, people will go to work, schools will be open and PB will continue its rantfest

    next ?

    Not everyone has our very comfortable lives, unfortunately.

    Quite. People on the edge of viability could be badly hit. We know a lot of people only just get by. No doubt the government is looking at measures to soften the impact. In our dreams.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 43,063
    HYUFD said:

    Good Morning Britain reporting today that Theresa May has privately told Ministers she is going to rule out a No Deal Brexit

    She can't tell that lot anything private, we hear about everything.

    As much as i think the Cooper plan is a pretty dishonest attempt to remain without saying that's the plan, it might be best for it to pass rather than continue chasing unicorns as official policy 're the backstop. That nice lady, Theresa May, she's told us for 4 months the deal won't change, we should believe her on that.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,496
    edited January 28
    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    Relying on some snow this week to see off a few more Leave voters is not only absurd but distasteful too and there is such a thing as central heating
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 43,063

    Sandpit said:

    I still think we leave on time, as an extension requires unanimity from the EU27 side. Even if it's 50/50 the value remains on the Leave side of the bet.

    A short extension to allow for the passing of legislation might be approved, but only if it's clear that the deal has passed and there's a clear Parliamentary majority for everything that needs to happen - which I don't think there is.

    A longer extension, past the EU elections, gives more problems from their side, so they would need to see a good reason for it other than just more talking. Remember that the clock is a feature as far as the EU is concerned, it's not in their interest to keep it running. They want to see the issue forced quickly so that we either leave with the deal or don't leave, to allow them to get on with other important things.

    Only the serious possibility of no deal is going to focus their minds. Also remember that between April 23rd and July 2nd the EU Parliament is not sitting, and they need to approve the same deal after it's been approved by the EU negotiators and the UK Parliament.

    Counterpoint:
    1) The EU never saw a can it didn't kick.
    2) "No extension for faffing" makes sense as a stance for as long as it's focussing minds, but everybody would prefer further faffing to a car crash.
    3) It's true that the need for unanimity adds a non-trivial risk of somebody sabotaging things, but a car crash is bad for everyone, including businesses and citizens in every member state, and the Council of Ministers has strong peer pressure in crisis situations in a way that wouldn't apply if there were parliaments involved.
    4) No non-bonkers person wants Brexit to happen, and every day it doesn't happen increases the chances that it won't happen.
    Despite a lot of noise, we are actually no further forward than we were in December:

    May has a deal nobody likes.
    Corbyn is still committed to a deal that’s not on offer.
    Nobody wants a No Deal, but nobody has a deal that can command a majority in Parliament.

    May has successful wasted 6 weeks.
    There are only 8 weeks to go.
    Yep. But it's worse than that too, since May is just trying the same thing and Cooper is just trying to delay things.

    We're very screwed.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784

    Sandpit said:

    Nigelb said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    Reading up on the details, it’s astonishing that no one involved in the business but not involved in the fraud didn’t ask some basic questions. The markings were better than Starbucks, with no dip in margins or profits per store in any year as the business grew. Simply not credible.

    Even less so, had anyone is senior management bothered to visit a couple of their outlets. I had the misfortune to go into their Stratford on Avon unit a couple of years back. Almost deserted - in one of the busiest tourist towns in England - and the food offering was worse that the average motorway service station.
    And it was obvious that very, very little money had been spent on fitting it out.

    Had I been a shareholder, I would have sold immediately.

    Boards work back from EBITDA, profit and revenue, don’t they? If they’re all looking good they are unlikely to ask too many questions.
    It's going to be really interesting to find out at what point the numbers started to look dodgy.

    The Restaurant manager would look at figures like REVPASH (revenue per available seat hour), and the regional manager would look at this as well as an EBITDA figure for the site. His boss would look at EBITDA plus the missing ITDA, plus profits for head office activities like HR, marketing and IT - and so on up the chain. Even the ops director would want to know the top performing sites on the REVPASH figures, as they'd be used for things like staff bonus schemes. Such basic information comes straight from the point of sale systems, rather than on spreadsheets.

    Someone somewhere must have realised that the figures their boss had were very different to the figures coming up the chain, or else there was a whole level of higher-ups keeping two sets of books.

    Yep - at the very least it indicates an entirely dysfunctional company culture. The board has to take responsibility for that.

    Indeed so. As @Roger and @NigelB note below, it's possible that the only restaurants the senior management visited were the very busy ones in central London.

    I hope this is a wake up call to more restaurant chains to automate more of their reporting systems, not that I'm biased as a consultant working with such systems of course! ;)
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,496

    HYUFD said:

    Good Morning Britain reporting today that Theresa May has privately told Ministers she is going to rule out a No Deal Brexit

    And as we all know, her word is her bond!!

    Given Parliament will almost certainly vote for a permanent Customs Union over No Deal just a reflection of the fact May is not going to cause a constitutional crisis by pitting the executive against the legislature
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,345

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: e need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    We've all known all along that any setbacks would be blamed on the remainers by the leavers.
    That's not entirely true. At least half will be blamed on the EU, with some justice.

    So Brussels will get blamed. Then what?

    life will go on, people will go to work, schools will be open and PB will continue its rantfest

    next ?

    Not everyone has our very comfortable lives, unfortunately.

    The time for realising that was before the vote.

    Then any of our centrists governments could have addressed the issues. But they didnt.

    And its still the case that the well off are simply using the "we care about society " shtick to pursue their own interests rather than actually giving a toss.

    Oddly your bugbear Corbyn is probably more in tune with whats needed than all the bleating Brexit caterwaulers
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 43,063

    Dura_Ace said:



    Oh, that lofty arrogance again, that 52% of the voters are "bonkers".

    We must only hope that the Japanese aren't being offered the benefit of your clinical insights.....

    Quite a few of them are now no longer bonkers as they are now dead. There is no longer a surviving majority for Leave - certainly not 52%. See the academic, peer reviewed study by Messrs Cutrice and Grabcocque. This next cold snap isn't going to help.
    And yet, the collective efforts of the Remainers and the EU are acting as excellent recruiting sergeants for more Leavers to join the ranks.....
    There’s no evidence for this. Quite the reverse.
    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-6635785/DAN-HODGES-die-hard-Remainer-arrogant-MPs-hard-Brexiteer.html

    You think he's alone?
    No, but there are those moving in the opposite direction too.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,496
    kle4 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Good Morning Britain reporting today that Theresa May has privately told Ministers she is going to rule out a No Deal Brexit

    She can't tell that lot anything private, we hear about everything.

    As much as i think the Cooper plan is a pretty dishonest attempt to remain without saying that's the plan, it might be best for it to pass rather than continue chasing unicorns as official policy 're the backstop. That nice lady, Theresa May, she's told us for 4 months the deal won't change, we should believe her on that.
    A majority for the Cooper and Spelman amendments this week will reflect the way the wind is heading
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 43,063
    Dura_Ace said:

    May ruling out N O D E A L would almost certainly mean it's now Plan A.

    It is, since the official plan looks to be deal without backstop, which means no deal if the EU say no.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784

    F1: just a rumour, but Twitter suggestion Ecclestone might try and buy F1 back from Liberty.

    Sounds bonkers. Doesn't mean it's not true, of course.

    That's definitely one for bonkers Twitter rumour of the day award!

    He's 88 now, and happily enjoying retirement in Brazil with a wife half his age. He always worked as a one-man-band, so what would be his succession plan for the sport?

    Liberty, having paid $4bn to Bernie, would presumably want $5bn or $6bn to sell up now - where would the extra cash come from?
  • tlg86 said:

    Not like she's ever lied about anything in the past...
    No Brexit is better than No Deal.

    The UK will be unable to have frictionless, tariff-free trade under World Trade Organization rules for up to seven years in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to two leading European Union law specialists.

    The ensuing chaos could double food prices and plunge Britain into a recession that could last up to 30 years, claim the lawyers who acted for Gina Miller in the historic case that forced the government to seek parliament’s approval to leave the EU.

    It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true.

    “No deal means leaving with nothing,” she said. “The anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years: even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades.”

    The government’s own statistics have estimated that under the worst case no-deal scenario, GDP would be 10.7% lower than if the UK stays in the EU, in 15 years.

    There are two apparently insurmountable hurdles to the UK trading on current WTO tariffs in the event of Britain crashing out in March, said Howard.

    Firstly, the UK must produce its own schedule covering both services and each of the 5,000-plus product lines covered in the WTO agreement and get it agreed by all the 163 WTO states in the 32 remaining parliamentary sitting days until 29 March 2019. A number of states have already raised objections to the UK’s draft schedule:


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/27/uk-cannot-simply-trade-on-wto-terms-after-no-deal-brexit-say-experts
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 43,063

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully iving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    We've all known all along that any setbacks would be blamed on the remainers by the leavers.
    That's not t half will be blamed on the EU, with some justice.
    a) The EU Commission would, so far as I can see, very, very much rather we didn't Leave.
    b) However if we do, they must, and will do their duty by the remaining members.

    It is after all, we, the British, who have upset the applecart and who don't seem to know how or even why.
    Who upset it is not really relevant right now. Politically we are very constrained, more than them. They have the power to help the deal over the line and they would still hold the upper hand. No deal is not in the interests of the remaining members, would an additional concession to avoid that be in their interests? They might say no, Ireland is (despite their words they seem keen on no deal because they don't believe a hard border will happen), but that we started this is not a consideration.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,345

    tlg86 said:

    Not like she's ever lied about anything in the past...
    No Brexit is better than No Deal.

    The UK will be unable to have frictionless, tariff-free trade under World Trade Organization rules for up to seven years in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to two leading European Union law specialists.

    The ensuing chaos could double food prices and plunge Britain into a recession that could last up to 30 years, claim the lawyers who acted for Gina Miller in the historic case that forced the government to seek parliament’s approval to leave the EU.

    It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true.

    “No deal means leaving with nothing,” she said. “The anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years: even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades.”

    The government’s own statistics have estimated that under the worst case no-deal scenario, GDP would be 10.7% lower than if the UK stays in the EU, in 15 years.

    There are two apparently insurmountable hurdles to the UK trading on current WTO tariffs in the event of Britain crashing out in March, said Howard.

    Firstly, the UK must produce its own schedule covering both services and each of the 5,000-plus product lines covered in the WTO agreement and get it agreed by all the 163 WTO states in the 32 remaining parliamentary sitting days until 29 March 2019. A number of states have already raised objections to the UK’s draft schedule:


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/27/uk-cannot-simply-trade-on-wto-terms-after-no-deal-brexit-say-experts
    ROFLMAO
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 43,063
    Sean_F said:

    ydoethur said:

    eek said:

    ydoethur said:

    ydoethur said:

    PM May rule out no deal?

    Fish in a barrel job this morning!
    If this is true (how would we know?) this is a significant climb down for May. She can no longer use the threat of No Deal to suborn Parliament to vote for her shite deal.
    She sort-of can since nobody believes anything she says either way. I mean, they won't believe her when she says she won't go No Deal, but they also can't be sure that she *won't* go No Deal.

    It's a weird kind of negotiating strength: Normally you gain by making your words credible, but since she's trying to threaten both sides simultaneously it might be just what she needs...
    At this moment the only people who can stop a no deal exit are MPs. And they can only do it not by posturing and whining but by taking a conscious, deliberate decision to either pass this deal, or to Revoke Article 50.

    It is therefore disingenuous for anyone to blame May for the mess we are in. She actually has a workable plan and the Ultras aside, remains the only person who has (the Cooper plan being so much hot air). It is Parliament that is causing this logjam, and it is Parliament that needs to get itself sorted.

    Hopefully next year there will be an election and a clearout, as they're demonstrating all the skill and grace and integrity of a Corbyn at the moment, pursuing impossible dreams and lying about them. But for the moment, we need to concentrate on surviving the next two months and three days.
    Would we be in this mess if Gina Miller had lost her court case? So the irony is that if we end up in No Deal it's Remains fault...
    Difficult to judge. May might have been toppled before signing the deal if Parliament had not been able to have a say, for instance.

    But certainly nobody can credibly say No Deal is not an option if they have failed to vote for a course of action that would avoid it.
    What most MP's want is a plan that (a) stops Brexit (b) avoids their having to take responsibility for doing so, and that 's the ultimate unicorn
    It's called a second referendum. They obviously as a group want to remain, that's how they do it. They should say that now, but Cooper and co want to ease us into it with a delay first.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 53,496
    edited January 28
    kle4 said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    May ruling out N O D E A L would almost certainly mean it's now Plan A.

    It is, since the official plan looks to be deal without backstop, which means no deal if the EU say no.
    No, it means permanent Customs Union which Parliament would almost certainly vote for instead and which Juncker backed at the weekend and which by ruling out No Deal May is not going to block
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 21,784
    HYUFD said:

    kle4 said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    May ruling out N O D E A L would almost certainly mean it's now Plan A.

    It is, since the official plan looks to be deal without backstop, which means no deal if the EU say no.
    No, it means permanent Customs Union which Parliament would almost certainly vote for instead and which Juncker backed at the weekend and which by ruling out No Deal May is not going to block
    There have been five or six votes on various forms of "A" or "The" customs union, all of which have failed in the Commons. Why would the result be any different if it were tried again?
  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 8,124
    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Charles said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.
    I think the source of the confusion has just revealed itself to be some rather dodgy accounting, rather than the innate success of the business!

    The question is how it managed to go on for so long without anyone noticing? As you say, Johnson's a smart guy and you think he'd have been asking the right questions.

    All rather weird, I guess there will be books written about it for the next generation of business and accounting students to study, and probably a few court cases for the law students to study too!
    When I’ve sat on a board you are dependent on the numbers they throw up. Absolutely you look at the KPIs and trends and any issues. But if the numbers are made up - provided they are consistent - then you assume they are correct.

    The auditors seem to have messed up in a big way if the cash balances were wrong. That’s a basic reconciliation
    While accountants in private companies might massage the figures slightly with things like valuations of leases and intangibles, the books at PV seem to bear no relationship to the true figures, with debt facilities and overdrafts apparently missing completely.

    I think it was your good self who said on here that audit is the next big scandal coming down the line, and this is undoubtedly a future textbook example of what happens when those who you are paying to be critical and cynical don't fulfill that role effectively - but still feel able to charge top rates for their services. Dare I suggest that the same might also be said of the non-executive directors, whom the shareholders might expect to be asking the right questions rather than simply assuming things are great?
    NED positions are difficult. I enjoy them because I am still learning but in the main they are a lot of personal risk for not much money
    I always assumed the whole non-exec director thing was the old boys network writ large. Unless you went to the right school (i.e private) you are unlikely to be invited to become a NED, but once you are on one board the invites will roll in it seems.

    The only change in recent years is that 'old boys' has become 'old boys and girls' as companies scramble to avoid appearing to be totally male dominated.
  • CD13CD13 Posts: 5,459
    What I find strange about this (and I'm not alone) is why Parliament can stop us leaving. They voted to let the people decide and promised to honour that promise.

    Why insist on backbench MPs having a say? It's nowt to do with them. It's up to the powers-that-be (the executive if you like) to fulfil their promise. Why bring in MPs who dislike the result to arrange it? They're the pissheads at the back in a pub discussion who just like attention.

    You may not like it, but that's puzzling a lot of people, me included. Had the Scot's voted for independence, would Parliament have insisted on strong Unionist MPs having a meaningful say in the outcome? If so, would the Scots have agreed?


  • BenpointerBenpointer Posts: 8,124

    tlg86 said:

    Not like she's ever lied about anything in the past...
    No Brexit is better than No Deal.

    The UK will be unable to have frictionless, tariff-free trade under World Trade Organization rules for up to seven years in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to two leading European Union law specialists.

    The ensuing chaos could double food prices and plunge Britain into a recession that could last up to 30 years, claim the lawyers who acted for Gina Miller in the historic case that forced the government to seek parliament’s approval to leave the EU.

    It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true.

    “No deal means leaving with nothing,” she said. “The anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years: even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades.”

    The government’s own statistics have estimated that under the worst case no-deal scenario, GDP would be 10.7% lower than if the UK stays in the EU, in 15 years.

    There are two apparently insurmountable hurdles to the UK trading on current WTO tariffs in the event of Britain crashing out in March, said Howard.

    Firstly, the UK must produce its own schedule covering both services and each of the 5,000-plus product lines covered in the WTO agreement and get it agreed by all the 163 WTO states in the 32 remaining parliamentary sitting days until 29 March 2019. A number of states have already raised objections to the UK’s draft schedule:


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/27/uk-cannot-simply-trade-on-wto-terms-after-no-deal-brexit-say-experts
    ROFLMAO
    You can afford to ROFL Alan. The poor sods up and down the country struggling to make ends meet at the moment will be the ones feeling the pain of no deal.
  • mattmatt Posts: 2,783

    Sandpit said:

    FPT

    AndyJS said:

    "Patisserie Valerie, which opened its first café in Soho in central London in 1926, called in the administrators. “This is a company that may have been built on sand all along and no one got wind of it,” said Gavin Pearson, a forensic accountant at Quantuma.

    Unlike many of its rivals in the casual dining business, Patisserie Valerie was reporting a rise in sales each year and an ever-growing pile of cash."


    https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/business/lid-is-lifted-on-40m-black-hole-at-heart-of-patisserie-valerie-x70p3c0vp

    There’s surely going to be a massive lawsuit coming down the line between the shareholders and the auditors here, it’s impossible that it was just one or two dodgy accountants. IIRC Luke Johnson wrote an eight figure cheque to keep them going when the problems first came to light. He’s a nice guy, but as one of very few people to have made serious money in the restaurant business he’s not going to suffer fools gladly.
    I have long been confused by the mysterious success of Patisserie Valerie. Surely there is a relatively limited market for gateaux?

    Luke Johnson is a very smart guy and it’s a shock to see he seems to have been so thoroughly hoodwinked.
    Every Sunday Times column that he wrote can be summarised as, “I’m very clever and you’re not”. Schadenfreude is a marvellous thing.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 27,331

    tlg86 said:

    Not like she's ever lied about anything in the past...
    No Brexit is better than No Deal.

    The UK will be unable to have frictionless, tariff-free trade under World Trade Organization rules for up to seven years in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to two leading European Union law specialists.

    The ensuing chaos could double food prices and plunge Britain into a recession that could last up to 30 years, claim the lawyers who acted for Gina Miller in the historic case that forced the government to seek parliament’s approval to leave the EU.

    It has been claimed that the UK could simply move to WTO terms if there is no deal with the EU. But Anneli Howard, a specialist in EU and competition law at Monckton Chambers and a member of the bar’s Brexit working group, believes this isn’t true.

    “No deal means leaving with nothing,” she said. “The anticipated recession will be worse than the 1930s, let alone 2008. It is impossible to say how long it would go on for. Some economists say 10 years, others say the effects could be felt for 20 or even 30 years: even ardent Brexiters agree it could be decades.”

    The government’s own statistics have estimated that under the worst case no-deal scenario, GDP would be 10.7% lower than if the UK stays in the EU, in 15 years.

    There are two apparently insurmountable hurdles to the UK trading on current WTO tariffs in the event of Britain crashing out in March, said Howard.

    Firstly, the UK must produce its own schedule covering both services and each of the 5,000-plus product lines covered in the WTO agreement and get it agreed by all the 163 WTO states in the 32 remaining parliamentary sitting days until 29 March 2019. A number of states have already raised objections to the UK’s draft schedule:


    https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jan/27/uk-cannot-simply-trade-on-wto-terms-after-no-deal-brexit-say-experts
    ROFLMAO
    I think that a 30 year recession can be safely discounted.
This discussion has been closed.