Tuesday, 9 June 2009

Electoral rigging or genuine mistake?

By now we all know about the results of the European elections in the UK and in Spain.
But what is not getting any decent media coverage is what seems to have happened in Spain. At this point, it is not clear whether this is a genuine “technology” error or something more sinister.
However, the more I read, the more I suspect it is the latter.

Not surprisingly, the Spanish media is being very quiet about this. Only the Catalan and Basque media is getting this issue any type of coverage.

It appears that votes for Iniciativa Internacionalista are not being attributed to this party. This, let’s not forget, is the party that the Spanish government tried to illegalise because of some dubious, non-existent connection with ETA.

Vilaweb (cat) has this article about it.
Avui (cat) also has an article.
The Avui article is scary. Apparently, non only II has been denied rightful votes, but also ERC votes in Catalonia have been attributed to Spanish fascist parties, even in the smallest villages in the countryside.

This is a scandal of major proportions.

The Avui article was top headline news at noon, but over time it has been displaced by other news. It would not be the first time there has been “instructions” from central government to the media as to how to report an event –as it happened with the train bombs in Madrid in 2004.

So far, I have not found any articles in the mainstream Spanish media.
(happy to add links if you find any)

The on-line translators on the right hand side will provide the gist of the issue in English, French, Spanish and other languages.

I have posted before how Spanish democracy is deficient and the sorry legacy of Franco’s henchmen and the cowardice of our politicians, but this really takes the biscuit and puts Spain in the same league as a banana republic.

I wonder when/if the BBC and our esteemed correspondents for the British media in Spain will pick up this issue.

Links:
Vilaweb (cat)
Avui (cat)
Gara (cas) Editorial
Observers thrown out of the recount in Barcelona (Gara -cas)
Público (cas) -well hidden
Tribuna (cat)
EITB (eng)

Blogs:
Victor Alexandre (cat)
The Badrash (eng)
Eguren Zone (cas)
Omnis Obstat (cat)
Racó Català (cat) (recount) (map of irregularities)

Tuesday, 2 June 2009

Thursday, 21 May 2009

Noise

Today I am going to write about financial markets and how the press reports financial news.

Sadly, I don’t write much about the markets because I need to be careful about what I say and what message I convey. Conduct of Business Rules and FSA Approved Persons, etc. There are far too many conmen out there and I cannot give you advice that suits your personal circumstances.

If you follow the news, today you will have read that S&P, the credit rating agency, has released a note on the outlook for UK sovereign debt.

The note was received in Bloomberg terminals at about 0924h.
The note is not available to the public but the BBC has a half-decent article about it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8061019.stm

In the minutes just after the announcement, GBP went down against both EUR and USD.

Immediately, the newswires went mad and the media reported that the decline of GBP was a consequence of the S&P note.

Even my favourite financial blog –for now- reported the story at 1000h:

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2009/05/21/56114/united-kingdom-the-first-rating-alarm-bell-rings/

I want you to look at that Bloomberg graph very closely. Notice that the time in the screen is 0928h, merely 6 minutes after the note release, with the post being published at 1000, just about 30 minutes after the news became public.
The graph only covers the previous 12 hours trading.
At 1008h, yours truly humbly suggests to the journalist to change the time period of the graph to 2 days.

It would have shown something like this:




Yet, this did not stop the FT or the vast majority of the media to make a bit hoo-ha about how the markets were reacting very badly to the S&P note.
Even FT Alphaville (a blog for the pros) kept publishing posts about it, despite my best attempts.

So, in the immediate aftermath of the press release, GBP went down about 1.8% vs USD but rebounding back very quickly so that 2 hour after the press release, the decline was only about 0.8%. Still, it was somewhat above yesterday’s closing price.

And this is the problem with financial journalism: market noise is mistaken as market reaction and since the market just produces noise 95% of the time, lots of effort, time and energy are spent trying to concoct explanations about events that are, the vast majority of the time, just random movements.

Yesterday, Wed 20 May, between 14-17h UK time, GBP went up about 1.5% against the USD, but there was no S&P release or other news item to justify an explanation.

Check out this graph:


As I write this at 2115h UK time, not only has GBP not reacted negatively to this morning’s S&P note, but is actually higher than when the note was published!
And the questions is: will this “market reaction” generate as much media frenzy as was unleashed this morning and early afternoon? Probably not.

The problem I have is thus:
I would also expect the tabloids, or The Times, to have a go at the Government publishing misinformation.
I fully expect uninformed, malicious and politically-biased numpties like Guido Fawkes to post something like “S&P downgrades UK government debt” [link].

In fact, nothing of the sort has happened. Not even close.
S&P has merely updated the market saying that it sees the outlook for the UK economy as negative, and that it is worried about the state of public finances and public debt levels.
When I read the note this morning, the first thing that crossed my mind was: “tell us something we don’t know!”
So, to recap.
+ It is a revision in outlook.
+ Before a downgrade happens, first an issuer (normally) is placed in “negative watch”.
+ After a bit of time in “negative watch”, then the downgrade follows.
+ This has not happened today.

As for the S&P’s record on analysing public (or private) finances, I refer to the sub-prime mess, the CDOs, Enron, Parmalat, etc, etc. Just for the record, S&P did not alter its outlook on UK debt during the ‘90s hyper-inflation years, when debt as a % of GDP was slightly higher than today’s levels.

Notwithstanding the huge problems in the economy and the massive amounts of household, government and, particularly, corporate financial debt, today’s events and news coverage is a wonderful example of what Taleb describes as noise and the narrative fallacy.

Somehow, we have built a system of news coverage where there is an obsession to attach a narrative to events, to seek causality regardless of the logic or empirical proof behind it.

I have only been in this business for about 7-8 years, but being a sceptic has helped me a long way to differentiate between reasoned analysis and logic and crap. Today was a lesson on crap journalism by a lot of media outlets.

If we cannot get a FT or BBC journalist to expand a simple graph to show that, actually, nothing has happened compared to yesterday's trading session, can you imagine when they have to explain something mildly complex to the public?


For the record, I attach below GBP-USD rates for 5 days and 3 years.








Update 11/06/2009

I have officially given up on AV: what a bunch of twats.

Unable to cope with any criticism of their flawed narrative logic, they removed one of my comments on the whole GBP/USD rates saga.

And today, in a trivial story about the signings of Kaka and Ronaldo by Real Madrid, I get yellow-card and then blacklisted for no reason that to write something that is public record –and because some arsehole Real Madrid took exception to it. What a joke.

Wednesday, 20 May 2009

Campaign struggling to start...

Well, the campaign to stop shaking hands with the less-than-honourable members has not made the impact I was hoping for… never mind.

I honestly think it would be a historical event if it were to catch on and spread all over the UK ahead of the European election on 20 June.

Any way, if you have a blog and want to spread the word, perhaps it is not too late.

http://trenator.blogspot.com/2009/05/dont-shake-hands-campaign.html

I have posted in The Independent, The Guardian, even it that Guido Fawkes blog (apologies Tom & Graeme, I thought this could get traction that way...) and other blogs but nothing is happening.

BBC censorship of Speaker's criticism

Sometimes I cannot help thinking that the BBC’s reputation for objectivity, neutrality and high journalistic standards is more a myth than reality. Particularly when it comes to criticism of the Scottish Labour party. In Spain everyone if full of how great the BBC is and how it should be a model for all public broadcasters. I used to agree. Now, after living in the UK for over 10 years, I am not sure. Myth, perception and reality intermingle.

Yesterday, I posted the below text in the Blether with Brian blog.
To my amazement, it has been removed as it apparently breaks the house rules on defamation.

Can anyone let me know what is in this post that is defamatory?

I have posted it again with a toned-down version, let’s see if it makes the cut…


========================
Brian,

The Speaker of the House is not a mere class rep.
The Speaker is supposed to lead.

If the less-than-honourable members have been up to no good, it is the Speaker’s job to tick them off.

Michael Martin was an awful speaker: inarticulate, mumbling, discourteous and with a tendency to gag people down. Nothing to do with class or background or accent: all to do with competence.

Michael Martin committed far too many errors to deserve any sympathy:

1) He was the main force behind the push for exemption from the FoI Act. He wanted the expenses system to be kept secret and wasted thousands of our tax money on legal fees.

2) When it was clear that this was going to come out, instead of saying sorry, instead of showing contrition or remorse, he calls in the Police to investigate the leak.

3) When a couple of backbenchers raise the issue, he shuts them down in the most childish and discourteous manner. (Hoey)

4) When another backbencher raises the issue of the no-confidence motion, again the mumbles, fumbles and shows why he should have never been the Speaker in the first place.

All this after having had a number of years to do something about this mess.
So, you understand that most of us have no sympathy for the shop steward that became one of them. Good riddance.

======================

Monday, 18 May 2009

Don’t shake hands campaign

Since the extent of the expenses scandal became clear, I have been flabbergasted at the dishonesty and the lack of morality of the vast majority of MPs.

Today, I propose that the public takes a stance.

I know I am a total nobody in the blogosphere but I think this is worth trying. If you can spread the message, perhaps it will catch on and set a global trend. With the European Elections campaign in June fast approaching, the least-than-honourable Members will be out and about campaigning to get our vote. Before we give them our vote, we should give them a piece of our mind.

What I am suggesting is that elected politicians are given the cold shoulder by the voting public.
I advocate that we should not shake hands with them, let alone let them kiss our babies for that arranged photo-opportunity.

Before we do such a thing, we are entitled to ask:

“Do you have a clear conscience with regards to your expenses claim?”

Alright, the answer is obvious: many of them do not seem to have a conscience; but still we should ask this and other questions. For example:
“Have you claimed for any personal items such as furniture, luxury
carpets, garden maintenance, pool cleaning, TVs, pet food, etc?”

“How many times have you flipped your home since becoming an MP?”

“How much have you claimed under the expense system?”

Just look them in the eye and watch their face.

If they are not elected yet, then we should be asking what expenses they are intending to claim on. I personally think that travel and mortgage interest should be enough for anybody on a £63k salary -nearly three times the national average before perks.

Then, after listening to their answer, and remembering at all times that they are highly skilled at lying and deceit, we will decide whether we want to shake hands or hand them over our precious baby to be kissed.

Be wise.

When in a hole, stop digging

Perhaps, there was a point in Michael Martin becoming the Speaker of the House. Maybe the toffs needed to be told by a Glasgow shop steward without any academic qualifications. Maybe the point needed to be made that anybody can raise to the top, even someone like Michael Martin.

But it has not worked and it has backfired.

Instead of the Man of the People, instead of keeping his feet on the ground, he has become the worst of them all. It tends to be the case that those who find wealth without risking their own, and with little effort or application, become easily accustomed to their new found riches.

The Labour Party stalwart, the man from Springburn, only the other day whinged like a spoilt kid against the pro-Tamil protesters outside Parliament. If The Daily Telegraph, not a traditional ally of socialist guerrillas, writes that these was one of the most polite and well managed demonstrations seen in Westminster, I for one will believe it.

Michael Martin however, in his chauffeur-driven car, complained bitterly during one of his interventions that his car had to drive around the square because of the pesky protesters. Pity the man.

Today, amazingly still in the job, he put out a statement with the s-word. Once upon a time, “sorry is the hardest word” worked as a journalistic cliché. After the empty apologies of the bankers, and the unsincere apologies of the least than Honourable Members, sorry does not mean anything. He said today he is “profoundly sorry”. [statement]

I, and any other person I speak to, am very clear that they are only sorry they got caught out with their pants down. They are not sorry about what they have been doing, they are sorry it became public, despite the Speaker’s best efforts to prevent disclosure at a cost of thousands of pounds in legal fees.

But today, when an MP raised the issue of a motion of no confidence, he dismissed it out of hand. If he had any morals, he would stand down but what can we expect from the man who furnishes his home, and gets his wife and her mate taxied around at our expense?


The BNP are obviously loving this and I would be surprised if they don’t get a few MEPs at the European Elections in June.

I remember the “Things Can Only Get Better” campaign (watched from The Clansman pub in Barcelona), followed up in the book, and since living in the UK since January 1999, and I have met many a Labour party activist who sincerely believed that the party would clean up politics, tackle the causes of crime and focus on education. And what we got was the privatisation of the NHS, tuitions fees, the Iraq war, sell-off of Royal Mail, and a perverse infatuation with the banking industry that has landed the UK in an absolute mountain of household and national debt, and a banking sector that is mostly insolvent. And then this.

Then, they complain when the public say they are all in it for themselves, and that they are all, save a handful of exceptions, a bunch of thiefs.

La Perla - Calle 13 & Ruben Blades