Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Is PaddyPower right not to pay out now on these “2020 or later

SystemSystem Posts: 6,666
edited January 21 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Is PaddyPower right not to pay out now on these “2020 or later” bets?

Quite often punters contact me about disputes they are having with bookies and this is a case where I think the bookie, PaddyPower is wrong.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 13,331
    edited January 21
    1st unlike Paddy Power settling team
  • UbarrowUbarrow Posts: 6
    I agree that they should pay out on the first, because this will happen, but not on the other two because they may never occur.
  • david_herdsondavid_herdson Posts: 15,893
    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 29,122


    This might be a good one. Thornberry is probably the most experienced media performer in the entire (active duty) Labour party. She aint gonna go down too easily.
  • The 👽 bet ? NO.

    The Trump Bet ? YES.

    Scottish Referendum ? Debatable.
  • isamisam Posts: 29,895

    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.

    Precisely correct.
  • isamisam Posts: 29,895



    This might be a good one. Thornberry is probably the most experienced media performer in the entire (active duty) Labour party. She aint gonna go down too easily.
    I really don’t get why she hasn’t made more of an impression on this election. The reasons why she might not be popular were known when she was favourite to win it
  • @rottenborough

    Does unite back Starmer?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 29,122
    Wonder which way Society of Labour Lawyers will go?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 29,122
    isam said:



    This might be a good one. Thornberry is probably the most experienced media performer in the entire (active duty) Labour party. She aint gonna go down too easily.
    I really don’t get why she hasn’t made more of an impression on this election. The reasons why she might not be popular were known when she was favourite to win it
    "There is a tide in the affairs of men, Which taken at the flood, leads on to fortune."
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 29,370

    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.

    There's no certainty that Trump will cease to be President, surely. The combination of medical advances and the repeal of the 22nd Amendment mean he could run, and run, and run.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 29,122

    @rottenborough

    Does unite back Starmer?

    If they do then I suspect we will all have heard Len's expletives from where ever we live.
  • rcs1000 said:

    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.

    There's no certainty that Trump will cease to be President, surely. The combination of medical advances and the repeal of the 22nd Amendment mean he could run, and run, and run.
    We should be realistic, though.
  • @rcs1000

    He can but he won't, I believe Martin​ Luther King's granddaughter is a potential future president.
  • IshmaelZIshmaelZ Posts: 652
    Moral of story: don't make comedy bets with comedy bookmakers.

    What were the odds on alien life post 2020? Were they effectively laying discovery in or before 2019?
  • dodradedodrade Posts: 385
    rcs1000 said:

    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.

    There's no certainty that Trump will cease to be President, surely. The combination of medical advances and the repeal of the 22nd Amendment mean he could run, and run, and run.
    What if he makes himself Emperor instead?
  • IshmaelZ said:

    Moral of story: don't make comedy bets with comedy bookmakers.

    What were the odds on alien life post 2020? Were they effectively laying discovery in or before 2019?

    Paddy Power are nothing but a gimmick bookies.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 1,203

    @rottenborough

    Does unite back Starmer?

    Interesting,

    I'm shore Len whats RLB to win, and if he dose not endorse her many on the hard left (including in the union) will be angry. but if he does and she loses anyway he has shone himself to be powerless and especially if she loses amngest the union members section. and he will have annoyed the new leader.

    Going for Nandy could be the magic solution, but again big risk if she does not win.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 1,203
    HYUFD said:
    the Democrats don't 'need' Florida which is lucky for them because I don't think they will get it.
  • BigRichBigRich Posts: 1,203
    HYUFD said:
    cynical timing, announce this after the MPs have nominated.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 14,013

    @rottenborough

    Does unite back Starmer?

    No. The majority of the executive are United Left, and they'll back RLB.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 29,370
    Regarding the bets: I understand why Paddy Power is not paying out on (for example) the aliens one.

    The problem I have is that - while aliens have not been found - neither you nor Paddy Power has won. And if aliens are discovered immediately after your death, well, Paddies will just say "couldn't find customer, I'll keep it". It seems there is an asymmetry that I'm not really happy with.
  • TheGreenMachineTheGreenMachine Posts: 1,019
    edited January 22
    rcs1000 said:

    Regarding the bets: I understand why Paddy Power is not paying out on (for example) the aliens one.

    The problem I have is that - while aliens have not been found - neither you nor Paddy Power has won. And if aliens are discovered immediately after your death, well, Paddies will just say "couldn't find customer, I'll keep it". It seems there is an asymmetry that I'm not really happy with.

    Your relatives could collect it, if it's placed in a betting shop and it would go towards your funeral.
  • @rottenborough

    Does unite back Starmer?

    No. The majority of the executive are United Left, and they'll back RLB.
    No worries, probably then.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 29,370

    rcs1000 said:

    Regarding the bets: I understand why Paddy Power is not paying out on (for example) the aliens one.

    The problem I have is that - while aliens have not been found - neither you nor Paddy Power has won. And if aliens are discovered immediately after your death, well, Paddies will just say "couldn't find customer, I'll keep it". It seems there is an asymmetry that I'm not really happy with.

    Your relatives could collect it, if it's placed in a betting shop and go towards your funeral.
    Which eliminates about 99% of bets :smile:
  • rcs1000 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    Regarding the bets: I understand why Paddy Power is not paying out on (for example) the aliens one.

    The problem I have is that - while aliens have not been found - neither you nor Paddy Power has won. And if aliens are discovered immediately after your death, well, Paddies will just say "couldn't find customer, I'll keep it". It seems there is an asymmetry that I'm not really happy with.

    Your relatives could collect it, if it's placed in a betting shop and go towards your funeral.
    Which eliminates about 99% of bets :smile:
    You would be Goosed either way then.
  • @rcs1000

    All my bets are done in store, I'm self excluded from every bookies online.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 12,978

    @rcs1000

    All my bets are done in store, I'm self excluded from every bookies online.

    Have you looked at Augur?
  • MikeLMikeL Posts: 5,440
    edited January 22
    FPT:

    Lords won't force the Ping Pong on Brexit Bill - even if they wanted to they don't now have the numbers.

    Lab + LD lead over Con has been being steadily whittled away - and it's now down to 28 - its lowest ever.

    In most of Govt Brexit defeats in last two days, Con has actually marginally outvoted Lab + LD - due to higher Con turnout (and note no Con rebels on most votes).

    So Govt has only been losing because of Crossbenchers + non-affiliateds - and if it goes to Ping Pong they always melt away straight away even if Lab + LD put up determined effort to block Govt.
  • ChameleonChameleon Posts: 2,099
    rcs1000 said:

    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.

    There's no certainty that Trump will cease to be President, surely. The combination of medical advances and the repeal of the 22nd Amendment mean he could run, and run, and run.
    IBAS would surely take a dim view to PP arguing that things that have never happened before in human history may still happen.

    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.

    I'd agree with that.

    However, in all bets above there are three possible outcomes: Something happens before x, something happens after x, bet void.

    In all three cases something happens before x has been ruled out, so if PP are sticking to their stance surely it'd make sense to return the stake to the punter, but only give the winnings when the thing actually happens.

    That way the punter isn't disadvantaged by having a stake that they cannot lose in any circumstance tied up, while PP doesn't return winnings on a bet that should be void.
  • Gabs3Gabs3 Posts: 602
    Pretty despicable corporate abuse by PaddyPower.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,908
    isam said:

    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.

    Precisely correct.
    I'm not sure I agree with this (that's not a sarcastic wording: I'm literally not sure).

    Do bets not have an expiry date and/or a settlement date? A date by which they must be resolved one way or another?
  • HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
  • Gabs3Gabs3 Posts: 602
    This made my jaw drop. This is the same IMF that forecast recession from Brexit...

    https://www.theweek.co.uk/105298/imf-british-economy-to-grow-faster-than-eurozone
  • Gabs3 said:

    This made my jaw drop. This is the same IMF that forecast recession from Brexit...

    https://www.theweek.co.uk/105298/imf-british-economy-to-grow-faster-than-eurozone

    I don't know about this particular forecast but would observe first that the Eurozone has been hamstrung by German-imposed austerity, and secondly that the main reason we did not join the Euro is that our economies did not converge and that ours is closer to the United States against which we have fallen back for the last decade.
  • rcs1000 said:

    Regarding the bets: I understand why Paddy Power is not paying out on (for example) the aliens one.

    The problem I have is that - while aliens have not been found - neither you nor Paddy Power has won. And if aliens are discovered immediately after your death, well, Paddies will just say "couldn't find customer, I'll keep it". It seems there is an asymmetry that I'm not really happy with.

    Your relatives could collect it, if it's placed in a betting shop and it would go towards your funeral.
    Do antepost bets lapse on death? There was some sort of kerfuffle on this a few years ago but I cannot remember the details.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 57,131
    Paddy should pay out on these bets, all of them.
    Best of luck to the Punter heading to IBAS
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 28,729
    I think that the first one couldn’t be clearer. There is no doubt that Trump will cease to be President one day and that day will now be 2020 or later. The other 2 are slightly more difficult in that they may not happen at all so they might not occur 2020 or later. Very badly worded bets in all cases and I agree with Mike PP should not get the benefit of the ambiguity.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 943
    BigRich said:

    HYUFD said:
    cynical timing, announce this after the MPs have nominated.
    Lets hope RLB is the victim of her own policy and is deselected, it would be wonderful.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 28,729
    Gabs3 said:

    This made my jaw drop. This is the same IMF that forecast recession from Brexit...

    https://www.theweek.co.uk/105298/imf-british-economy-to-grow-faster-than-eurozone

    I have offered a bet on here about this a couple of times. There have been no takers, not even amongst the we are all doomed brigade.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 33,613
    I've had a dispute with Ladbrokes recently which disappointed me and still hasn't been resolved to my satisfaction.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 28,598
    DavidL said:

    Gabs3 said:

    This made my jaw drop. This is the same IMF that forecast recession from Brexit...

    https://www.theweek.co.uk/105298/imf-british-economy-to-grow-faster-than-eurozone

    I have offered a bet on here about this a couple of times. There have been no takers, not even amongst the we are all doomed brigade.
    I’m involuntarily betting enough money on this particular proposition thanks to mad obsessives, I don’t need to top up for the sake of a macho wager.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 33,613
    Given the current climate (where much betting is under threat of being regulated out of existence) if I were a bookie I'd be settling markets under the most generous interpretation possible for winning punters.

    It's not as if there're a large number.
  • ydoethurydoethur Posts: 25,389

    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.

    In that case, they shouldn’t have taken the bet, as it doesn’t have a time limit on paying out. I would argue that ‘never’ could be included in ‘later.’

    They seem even more twisty and dishonest than AQA and speaking as a former employee who left after being swindled once too often that is saying something.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 28,729

    DavidL said:

    Gabs3 said:

    This made my jaw drop. This is the same IMF that forecast recession from Brexit...

    https://www.theweek.co.uk/105298/imf-british-economy-to-grow-faster-than-eurozone

    I have offered a bet on here about this a couple of times. There have been no takers, not even amongst the we are all doomed brigade.
    I’m involuntarily betting enough money on this particular proposition thanks to mad obsessives, I don’t need to top up for the sake of a macho wager.
    Well you'll be relieved to see that the prospects of your involuntary bet are improving all the time Alastair. FWIW I think that these forecasts are still on the pessimistic side, especially for this year where there will be "catch up" on investment. The employment figures yesterday were certainly consistent with that and the continued growth in real incomes is consistent with a higher level of demand.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 28,598
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Gabs3 said:

    This made my jaw drop. This is the same IMF that forecast recession from Brexit...

    https://www.theweek.co.uk/105298/imf-british-economy-to-grow-faster-than-eurozone

    I have offered a bet on here about this a couple of times. There have been no takers, not even amongst the we are all doomed brigade.
    I’m involuntarily betting enough money on this particular proposition thanks to mad obsessives, I don’t need to top up for the sake of a macho wager.
    Well you'll be relieved to see that the prospects of your involuntary bet are improving all the time Alastair. FWIW I think that these forecasts are still on the pessimistic side, especially for this year where there will be "catch up" on investment. The employment figures yesterday were certainly consistent with that and the continued growth in real incomes is consistent with a higher level of demand.
    We’ll see. You’re reading far too much into individual monthly data in my view to justify your own agenda and ignoring any conflicting information.

    Meanwhile the sight of ardent Leavers (disclosed and undisclosed) cavorting with joy at predictions that Britain is going to endure anaemic growth for the foreseeable future is bewildering.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 31,883

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 5,742
    DavidL said:

    Gabs3 said:

    This made my jaw drop. This is the same IMF that forecast recession from Brexit...

    https://www.theweek.co.uk/105298/imf-british-economy-to-grow-faster-than-eurozone

    I have offered a bet on here about this a couple of times. There have been no takers, not even amongst the we are all doomed brigade.
    What's the bet?
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 28,729
    rkrkrk said:

    DavidL said:

    Gabs3 said:

    This made my jaw drop. This is the same IMF that forecast recession from Brexit...

    https://www.theweek.co.uk/105298/imf-british-economy-to-grow-faster-than-eurozone

    I have offered a bet on here about this a couple of times. There have been no takers, not even amongst the we are all doomed brigade.
    What's the bet?
    That the UK will outgrow the EZ average this calendar year.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 28,729

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Gabs3 said:

    This made my jaw drop. This is the same IMF that forecast recession from Brexit...

    https://www.theweek.co.uk/105298/imf-british-economy-to-grow-faster-than-eurozone

    I have offered a bet on here about this a couple of times. There have been no takers, not even amongst the we are all doomed brigade.
    I’m involuntarily betting enough money on this particular proposition thanks to mad obsessives, I don’t need to top up for the sake of a macho wager.
    Well you'll be relieved to see that the prospects of your involuntary bet are improving all the time Alastair. FWIW I think that these forecasts are still on the pessimistic side, especially for this year where there will be "catch up" on investment. The employment figures yesterday were certainly consistent with that and the continued growth in real incomes is consistent with a higher level of demand.
    We’ll see. You’re reading far too much into individual monthly data in my view to justify your own agenda and ignoring any conflicting information.

    Meanwhile the sight of ardent Leavers (disclosed and undisclosed) cavorting with joy at predictions that Britain is going to endure anaemic growth for the foreseeable future is bewildering.
    I am not cavorting. I am simply adhering to my long held and often expressed view that in economic terms Brexit will be a completely damp squib one way or the other and that there will be several more important factors that will determine our progress or lack of it. I agree that the levels of growth in these surveys is nothing to get excited about but Germany in particular and the EZ in general are likely to do worse.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 33,613
    I’ve seen a dystopian film about this:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-51202000
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 33,613

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
  • TGOHF666TGOHF666 Posts: 391
    Could we see a Nandy : Long-Bailey price crossover this weekend ?
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 943

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 28,598
    You’ll simultaneously get Leavers telling you that it is outrageous and it doesn’t matter in the slightest.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 33,613
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Gabs3 said:

    This made my jaw drop. This is the same IMF that forecast recession from Brexit...

    https://www.theweek.co.uk/105298/imf-british-economy-to-grow-faster-than-eurozone

    I have offered a bet on here about this a couple of times. There have been no takers, not even amongst the we are all doomed brigade.
    I’m involuntarily betting enough money on this particular proposition thanks to mad obsessives, I don’t need to top up for the sake of a macho wager.
    Well you'll be relieved to see that the prospects of your involuntary bet are improving all the time Alastair. FWIW I think that these forecasts are still on the pessimistic side, especially for this year where there will be "catch up" on investment. The employment figures yesterday were certainly consistent with that and the continued growth in real incomes is consistent with a higher level of demand.
    We’ll see. You’re reading far too much into individual monthly data in my view to justify your own agenda and ignoring any conflicting information.

    Meanwhile the sight of ardent Leavers (disclosed and undisclosed) cavorting with joy at predictions that Britain is going to endure anaemic growth for the foreseeable future is bewildering.
    I am not cavorting. I am simply adhering to my long held and often expressed view that in economic terms Brexit will be a completely damp squib one way or the other and that there will be several more important factors that will determine our progress or lack of it. I agree that the levels of growth in these surveys is nothing to get excited about but Germany in particular and the EZ in general are likely to do worse.
    It depends. Our advantage is in services whereas Germany’s is in goods.

    So it probably depends on us striking enough trade deals in services and regulating them domestically flexibly enough to take advantage of future global growth opportunities whilst first offsetting for reduced ease of access into the EU market.

    A tricky balancing act, and it will probably take 10-15 years before we’re clear. But it’s very possible.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 33,613

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    I find that (and her) strangely cute and sexy.

    Please don’t ask me why.

    RLB reminds me of my old headmistress.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 31,883

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    And the prissy. Especially a prissy Northerner.

    Perfect for saying "That won't do. That won't do at all..."

    As we're being shallow, like.
  • From earlier:


    Brutal for RLB and Starmer. Starmer was the most known candidate and slated heavily. Nandy was least known, but when shown videos of her gathered a lot of support in the room.
  • HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    Very first thing my wife (labour activist. Yes... I know) said when we watched the leadership debates “she has a lisp”.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 28,598
    On topic, none of these bets deal directly with the case where the event will not happen. The proposition was offered by Paddy Power. It was open to them to specify that the bet would not pay until the event happened. They did not. They should pay out.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 6,630

    From earlier:


    Brutal for RLB and Starmer. Starmer was the most known candidate and slated heavily. Nandy was least known, but when shown videos of her gathered a lot of support in the room.

    Whilst this is informative and interesting I’m wary of treating this as gospel. My personal experience speaking to ex Lab now Con Brexiteers in the North East is very different. Starmer is popular.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 31,883
    l

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    I find that (and her) strangely cute and sexy.

    Please don’t ask me why.

    RLB reminds me of my old headmistress.
    "Cut and sexy" is damn rare in a politician.

    Although there apparently were those who had the hots for Maggie. (I suspect there was near total overlap with those who would pay to have their todger thrashed with nettles....)
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 23,297
    I agree with Alastair that the wording of the bets is sloppy.

    Nevertheless the punter is surely having a laugh if s/he ever expected to be paid out for aliens being discovered on or after 2020 simply because aliens hadn’t been discovered before 31 December 2019.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 943

    l

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    I find that (and her) strangely cute and sexy.

    Please don’t ask me why.

    RLB reminds me of my old headmistress.
    "Cut and sexy" is damn rare in a politician.

    Although there apparently were those who had the hots for Maggie. (I suspect there was near total overlap with those who would pay to have their todger thrashed with nettles....)
    Who was the female Labour MP who was a member of an obscure Catholic "sect" , which did have some weird connotations if not the same/ similarish.. once thought of a high flier in Blair/ Brown era?
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 5,907

    l

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    I find that (and her) strangely cute and sexy.

    Please don’t ask me why.

    RLB reminds me of my old headmistress.
    "Cut and sexy" is damn rare in a politician.

    Although there apparently were those who had the hots for Maggie. (I suspect there was near total overlap with those who would pay to have their todger thrashed with nettles....)
    I met Maggie at an event in 1984 and I can say that she had an enormous amount of sex appeal.
  • MattWMattW Posts: 2,754
    Stirring from my Christmas Lurgy death bed, I still owe someone's charity £20 because the Tories won Ashfield.

    Richard Nabavi?
  • EndillionEndillion Posts: 1,909

    l

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    I find that (and her) strangely cute and sexy.

    Please don’t ask me why.

    RLB reminds me of my old headmistress.
    "Cut and sexy" is damn rare in a politician.

    Although there apparently were those who had the hots for Maggie. (I suspect there was near total overlap with those who would pay to have their todger thrashed with nettles....)
    Who was the female Labour MP who was a member of an obscure Catholic "sect" , which did have some weird connotations if not the same/ similarish.. once thought of a high flier in Blair/ Brown era?
    Ruth Kelly and Opus Dei, I think.
  • l

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    I find that (and her) strangely cute and sexy.

    Please don’t ask me why.

    RLB reminds me of my old headmistress.
    "Cut and sexy" is damn rare in a politician.

    Although there apparently were those who had the hots for Maggie. (I suspect there was near total overlap with those who would pay to have their todger thrashed with nettles....)
    Who was the female Labour MP who was a member of an obscure Catholic "sect" , which did have some weird connotations if not the same/ similarish.. once thought of a high flier in Blair/ Brown era?
    Ruth Kelly. Very cute in a weird kind of way.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 4,329
    https://www.gov.uk/government/news/indian-parliamentarians-tour-uks-largest-aircraft-carrier

    India measuring up HMS PoW for carpets and curtains. #classicdom
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 28,877

    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.

    100% agreed.
  • squareroot2squareroot2 Posts: 943

    l

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    I find that (and her) strangely cute and sexy.

    Please don’t ask me why.

    RLB reminds me of my old headmistress.
    "Cut and sexy" is damn rare in a politician.

    Although there apparently were those who had the hots for Maggie. (I suspect there was near total overlap with those who would pay to have their todger thrashed with nettles....)
    Who was the female Labour MP who was a member of an obscure Catholic "sect" , which did have some weird connotations if not the same/ similarish.. once thought of a high flier in Blair/ Brown era?
    Ruth Kelly. Very cute in a weird kind of way.
    That's it.. Opus Dei, self flagellation.. the mind boggles.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 4,812

    You’ll simultaneously get Leavers telling you that it is outrageous and it doesn’t matter in the slightest.
    It will enable them to further wallow in their faux-grievance culture, and the Express and Mail can whip up a little more foreigner hatred dressed up as anti-EU rhetoric.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 28,877

    You’ll simultaneously get Leavers telling you that it is outrageous and it doesn’t matter in the slightest.
    Absolutely right. The two things are not contradictory, my toddler can throw an outrageous tantrum but it doesn't matter by the end of the day and giving in to her only encourages more bad behaviour.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 31,883

    l

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    I find that (and her) strangely cute and sexy.

    Please don’t ask me why.

    RLB reminds me of my old headmistress.
    "Cut and sexy" is damn rare in a politician.

    Although there apparently were those who had the hots for Maggie. (I suspect there was near total overlap with those who would pay to have their todger thrashed with nettles....)
    I met Maggie at an event in 1984 and I can say that she had an enormous amount of sex appeal.
    Then we'll let the rest of that lie....

    For now.
  • BarnesianBarnesian Posts: 5,375

    l

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    I find that (and her) strangely cute and sexy.

    Please don’t ask me why.

    RLB reminds me of my old headmistress.
    "Cut and sexy" is damn rare in a politician.

    Although there apparently were those who had the hots for Maggie. (I suspect there was near total overlap with those who would pay to have their todger thrashed with nettles....)
    I met Maggie at an event in 1984 and I can say that she had an enormous amount of sex appeal.
    Hmm
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 67,819

    From earlier:


    Brutal for RLB and Starmer. Starmer was the most known candidate and slated heavily. Nandy was least known, but when shown videos of her gathered a lot of support in the room.

    Whilst this is informative and interesting I’m wary of treating this as gospel. My personal experience speaking to ex Lab now Con Brexiteers in the North East is very different. Starmer is popular.
    Starmer was still more popular than Long Bailey in that focus group but the polling we have suggests Starmer is a bit more popular in London, the South and Scotland than he is in the North and Midlands
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 28,598

    You’ll simultaneously get Leavers telling you that it is outrageous and it doesn’t matter in the slightest.
    Absolutely right. The two things are not contradictory, my toddler can throw an outrageous tantrum but it doesn't matter by the end of the day and giving in to her only encourages more bad behaviour.
    One day, a long day from now, you will come to realise that you are the toddler.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 67,819
    edited January 22
    Given the UK under Boris is only seeking a basic trade deal not regulatory alignment no surprise there with he EU withholding Mutual Recognition Agreemtents as a result even if a deal is agreed to minimise tariffs on goods
  • isamisam Posts: 29,895
    rcs1000 said:

    Regarding the bets: I understand why Paddy Power is not paying out on (for example) the aliens one.

    The problem I have is that - while aliens have not been found - neither you nor Paddy Power has won. And if aliens are discovered immediately after your death, well, Paddies will just say "couldn't find customer, I'll keep it". It seems there is an asymmetry that I'm not really happy with.

    More fool the person having the bet.
    viewcode said:

    isam said:

    I don't think PP should be under an obligation to pay out on an outcome which the bet implied would happen and which hasn't yet, merely because the bet was for the last, open-ended time-period offered.

    If there is no further IndyRef, the punter shouldn't be entitled to pay out; likewise re aliens.

    The Trump bet is a different matter. Trump will cease to be president sometime and on that basis, PP should pay out.

    Precisely correct.
    I'm not sure I agree with this (that's not a sarcastic wording: I'm literally not sure).

    Do bets not have an expiry date and/or a settlement date? A date by which they must be resolved one way or another?
    The thing (Aliens found/second Indy Ref) has to happen for the bet to be paid out. If the bet were "Will there be an Aliens found/Indy Ref before end of 2019" then they would have to pay out now
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 33,613
    Nigelb said:
    Boeing is in very serious trouble.

    It’s remarkable that the company have been so slow to recognise and act on this.
  • l

    HYUFD said:
    This is terribly shallow of me, but she's got the disapproving letterbox mouth thar Cherie Blair has. Sets my teeth on edge.
    Well, if we are being terribly shallow....

    ....RLB always looks to me that she has been created by Aardman Animation. That tiny mouth (obviously crafted so as to require less movement of the plasticine per frame). That Wallace-style Northern voice, just a little too deep.

    Here's a challenge to any hacks reading. See if you can contrive to get her to say "Wensleydale"......
    The tiny mouth doesn’t help her at all.

    Associated with the humourless and dictators down the ages.
    Well, Nandy's noticeable lisp doesn't help her either. We live in a modern television age, these things, however unfairly, now seem to matter. Do any of the other candidates have tv type issues?
    I find that (and her) strangely cute and sexy.

    Please don’t ask me why.

    RLB reminds me of my old headmistress.
    "Cut and sexy" is damn rare in a politician.

    Although there apparently were those who had the hots for Maggie. (I suspect there was near total overlap with those who would pay to have their todger thrashed with nettles....)
    I met Maggie at an event in 1984 and I can say that she had an enormous amount of sex appeal.
    Then we'll let the rest of that lie....

    For now.
    I can’t get this out of my head...

  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 28,877
    HYUFD said:

    Given the UK under Boris is only seeking a basic trade deal not regulatory alignment no surprise there with he EU withholding Mutual Recognition Agreemtents as a result even if a deal is agreed to minimise tariffs on goods
    Canada and Japan have Mutual Recognition Agreements but no regulatory alignment.
  • Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 28,877

    You’ll simultaneously get Leavers telling you that it is outrageous and it doesn’t matter in the slightest.
    Absolutely right. The two things are not contradictory, my toddler can throw an outrageous tantrum but it doesn't matter by the end of the day and giving in to her only encourages more bad behaviour.
    One day, a long day from now, you will come to realise that you are the toddler.
    Keep telling yourself that. Funny I thought I was supposed to realise that in the recession before Brexit after the referendum result, then it was after invoking Article 50, then it was going to be after Brexit. Now we've still not even Brexited yet and you're kicking the can to "a long day from now".

    You are so stubborn you still can't face the fact you were wrong can you?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 28,598

    You’ll simultaneously get Leavers telling you that it is outrageous and it doesn’t matter in the slightest.
    Absolutely right. The two things are not contradictory, my toddler can throw an outrageous tantrum but it doesn't matter by the end of the day and giving in to her only encourages more bad behaviour.
    One day, a long day from now, you will come to realise that you are the toddler.
    Keep telling yourself that. Funny I thought I was supposed to realise that in the recession before Brexit after the referendum result, then it was after invoking Article 50, then it was going to be after Brexit. Now we've still not even Brexited yet and you're kicking the can to "a long day from now".

    You are so stubborn you still can't face the fact you were wrong can you?
    Upthread we have @Casino_Royale telling us that maybe - just maybe, if all the stars align - we might start seeing benefits from Brexit in fifteen years' time.

    Meanwhile the economy continues to languish, having drifted far behind its peers since the referendum vote, and Brexiteers hug themselves with delight because of an estimate that Britain might have anaemic growth for the foreseeable future if the government hoses the country with money that it can't afford to spend.

    Look out the window at a grey, cold, dark January day. That is Brexit - dismal, dull and unending.
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 6,630
    So the Democrats could put up a neo Nazi in California and still win basically.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 67,819
    edited January 22

    HYUFD said:

    Given the UK under Boris is only seeking a basic trade deal not regulatory alignment no surprise there with he EU withholding Mutual Recognition Agreemtents as a result even if a deal is agreed to minimise tariffs on goods
    Canada and Japan have Mutual Recognition Agreements but no regulatory alignment.
    CETA for example includes a commitment to close co operation by Canada with the EU on technical regulations for testing and certifying products and also a requirement to identify the rules of origin of goods and requires Canada to uphold EU standards on food safety, workers rights and the environment

    https://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/in-focus/ceta/ceta-chapter-by-chapter/
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 28,598
    Lisa Nandy evidently looked at that poll of Labour members and their views of Labour leaders.
This discussion has been closed.