Barclays Share Discussion Threads

[portside1] 09/5/2021 19:21

Stonedyou , Scotland and the Eu The Eu could end up in big trouble if it allows Scotland in to the Eu Barcelona will then attack the Eu for not allowing them a vote Their will be trouble on the streets big time

[joestalin] 09/5/2021 19:09

Biden? What has he got to do with anything?

[johnwise] 09/5/2021 18:48

Mark Levin is a great Patriot, very intelligent and a great historian..

VIDEO

Life, Liberty & Levin FULL May 8, 21

"Biden is importing a new class of voter"

[portside1] 09/5/2021 18:32

Stonedyou .We should give Scots the vote They are costing the rest of the U.K. a fortune Pull all U.K. companies out of Scotland Give all the nhs staff in Scotland to stay or leave beforeIt is not funded by the U.K. no Scots to be allowed to put money into any U.K. bank No U.K. passport No pound Hard border with visa to cross ever time No U.K. passport not allowed to work in the U.K. and if you live in Scotland you are not allowed a U.K. passport Let them go and their are thousands sent from Scotland on benefits to U.K. their are hundreds in U.K. sent from Scotland who are on benefits send them back

[stonedyou] 09/5/2021 18:23

Philip Thomas

How did Sage get it so wrong?

Professor Neil Ferguson struck an unusually optimistic tone this week. With just one Covid death reported on Monday, and infection levels at an eight-month low in the UK, the architect of the original lockdown said: ‘The data is very encouraging and very much in line with what we expected.’ The first half of that statement is certainly true; the second half much less so.

As an unofficial member of the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (he resigned in an official capacity after breaking lockdown rules) Prof Ferguson has been responsible for much of the pessimistic modelling during the pandemic. For example, his team at Imperial College were predicting as late as 30 March that only 45 per cent of the population would be protected against severe disease by 21 June, even under ‘optimistic’ assumptions. In fact, hard evidence based on the Office of National Statistics measurement shows that 68 per cent of the population already had antibodies against Covid-19 by 7 April, which meant that either they had received at least one vaccination or they had recovered from Covid-19 (or indeed both). Whatever the case, they would certainly have a fair degree of immunity, and thus be protected from serious illness.

The growth in antibodies in England's population could be predicted using an uncomplicated computer model, so how did Imperial get it so wrong? The PCCF model I developed at the University of Bristol was able to match to within a percentage point the ONS figure on 7 April - and suggests that 74 per cent of the adult population had antibodies by 2 May. As you can see in the below graph, the PCCF antibodies predictor in red closely tracked the ONS upper and lower antibody ranges from last summer onwards. The chart shows that three quarters of England’s total population, including children, now have protection and, as a minimum, won’t suffer serious illness.

Although Ferguson’s team at Imperial College has been notable for its pessimistic predictions, it has not been alone. One modelling study from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, which also contributed to Sage's interim roadmap assessment in advance of the next step out of lockdown, assumed that two doses of the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine would only give 31 per cent protection against infection and just 72 per cent against dying from the disease. These are bewilderingly low figures, not only because of the much more encouraging field trial evidence that had been around for months, but also because a large-scale study on the ground found that a single dose of the AZ vaccine was 94 per cent effective in preventing hospitalisation in Scotland.

The R-number: Sage’s abysmal track record.

A key component that has contributed to Sage's doomsday outlook is the R-number (the number of people the average person with Covid will pass the virus onto. Below one and the epidemic shrinks; above one and it grows). The R-number estimate released by Sage is decided through online debate amongst a group of academics from 11 institutions, each of whom argues for their particular figure. Eventually some sort of judgement call is made, and agreed upper and lower values are made public each week. This process, pursued throughout the pandemic, is not scientific and has produced answers of dubious worth.

There are two main problems with Sage’s working. First, their estimates are 18 days out of date when they arrive. Second, even then, they are inaccurate. The ONS figures, seen as the gold standard, are in red below: pretty far from the Sage range of estimates (in blue).

It's a terrible shame that, for the last year, the government has not been guided by the ONS-based estimate of the R-number. Besides being fully scientific, ONS-based estimates also reduce the measurement delay, since they are only nine days in arrears when they arrive, as opposed to being 18 days out of date, like Sage's numbers. How different things could have been if the ONS data had been more influential on the government’s thinking. This would have allowed people greater freedom and minimised disruption to the economy while still keeping the NHS well protected.

Fundamentally, Prof Ferguson and his team - and the other Sage modellers - have overcomplicated their modelling, which is inappropriate when the data we have on the virus is very limited, as it always will be with any new disease. The additional complexity of the Sage models might be academically satisfying and might, indeed, seem impressive to politicians. But it has not brought greater accuracy. At Bristol University, the PCCF model has also been used to forecast the R-number - and has come far closer to the ONS.

n 2002 in the aftermath of the mad cow disease fiasco (which Prof Ferguson and others suggested could kill millions). I provided evidence to parliament alongside my colleague Professor Martin Newby. We had been sceptical of the dire figures bandied around by Imperial, which led to the slaughter of 4.4 million cattle and the adoption of pointless countermeasures costing billions of pounds after the risk to humans, always very small, had become negligible. Our straight-forward modelling showed, correctly, that variant-Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease (the human form) would result in a few hundred deaths at most. As part of our evidence, we said:


“The government's continued inability to give proper consideration to the spectrum of scientific opinion has been very expensive and must be a cause for major concern. It is clear that those tasked with devising policy – ministers and civil servants – need to adopt a more critical attitude to the scientific advice they are offered, even when that advice comes from one of their advisory bodies.

It is a shame that 18 years on this recommendation has not been heeded. Focusing on the advice of a handful of particular scientists, who all broadly agreed with one another, has meant that the PM has received inaccurate estimates of the R-number throughout the pandemic, despite it being an easy figure to measure. As we move forward, having defeated this pandemic, it is vital that lessons are learnt for next time.


Philip Thomas is professor of risk management at the University of Bristol

[portside1] 09/5/2021 17:30

You will not find one black person who has done or said anything for the better of the world ,Not one only to use their colour to attempt to make money or get a job

[portside1] 09/5/2021 17:29

Afternoon. Stoned just back from spoons not many their but the good lads who listen to what I say Most are young and agree with all I say They still want me to put up for a mp They say they would get all the young to vote for my polices I may just do what they want It's time for some one to tell the truth about the race card and it's evil practices to destroy the British way of life

[portside1] 09/5/2021 17:25

Why do the blm never speak out about the murdering and raping of blacks in all black run countries Ever black run country is a cesspit of evil murdering scum But the scum called blm never speak out they are just liars and low life scum Did you know that floyds brother had not spoken to him for years but now going full out to get money another evil piece of scum Blm only interested in black lives when their is money to be had A filthy org of crime

[stonedyou] 09/5/2021 17:24

porty - Afternoon....

[trev1223] 09/5/2021 15:47

Porty - thought you might be interested in this.
hxxps://www.cornwalllive.com/news/cornwall-news/cornish-generations-victimised-barbary-slave-4231738

[bernie37] 09/5/2021 11:59

I think some of the best shares to buy now are located in the financial sector. As the UK economy recovers from the pandemic, I think this sector will benefit substantially from increased economic activity. And with that in mind, here are three FTSE 100 bargains I would add to my portfolio today.

Best shares to buy now

The first company is the asset management and insurance group M&G (LSE: MNG).

This company effectively comprises the bulk of insurer Prudential‘s UK operation. This is predominantly an asset management business with a legacy insurance division.

The asset management business was hit hard last year when the pandemic struck. However, rising asset prices have helped the segment recently. As the UK economy recovers, I think this trend will continue.

One of the things I really like about this business is its valuation. The stock is currently dealing at a price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 9.4. I think that looks cheap compared to the market average of around 14.

This valuation is the primary reason I would add M&G to my portfolio FTSE 100 stocks. The main risks and challenges facing the group are the potential for another market sell-off, which could hit asset values and profits, and rising competition in the asset management sector.

Splitting up the business

I would also buy FTSE 100 insurance group Aviva (LSE: AV) for my FTSE 100 recovery stocks portfolio.

Over the past few years, this company has fallen out of favour with the market due to a lack of strategy. That is changing. The new management has been selling off divisions and refocusing the business on its core operations.

By freeing up capital from overseas operations, I think the company should be able to invest in its UK division just at the right time, when the economy is recovering from the pandemic. This growth potential is the main reason why I would buy the insurer for my portfolio.

The main risk facing the group is the potential for a significant increase in interest rates. As a life insurance company, this could substantially increase the firm’s liabilities, which could have a devastating impact on its bottom line.

FTSE 100 stock

The final company I would buy for my FTSE 100 recovery stocks portfolio is the banking giant Barclays (LSE: BARC).

The group’s investment bank helped it weather the worst of the crisis, and its retail bank should help drive growth as we advance. An improving economy should lead to higher loan demand and lower loan losses. This would allow Barclays to increase its profitability.

The bank has also benefited from lower than expected loan write-offs during the pandemic. Its balance sheet is stronger as a result, with the capital ratio coming in at 14.6% at the end of the first quarter. This was slightly above management’s targeted range.

Despite the bank’s improving outlook, it still faces some big challenges though. Another wave of coronavirus could inflict significant loan losses on the group. In addition, a slower than expected economic recovery could also hurt growth. To put it another way, Barclays’ outlook is far from clear.

Nevertheless, I would buy the company for my portfolio of FTSE 100 financial recovery stocks right now.

[joestalin] 09/5/2021 10:51

According to the Observer, the Church of England will issue new guidance this week encouraging its thousands of parishes to scrutinise their buildings and grounds for historical references to slavery and colonialism.

It will say that "ignoring such heritage is not an option", meaning plaques and monuments may have to be removed, relocated or given additional context.

If they can believe in an invisible man with magical powers, then they can be made to believe anything.

[joestalin] 09/5/2021 10:42

According to the Observer, the Church of England will issue new guidance this week encouraging its thousands of parishes to scrutinise their buildings and grounds for historical references to slavery and colonialism.

It will say that "ignoring such heritage is not an option", meaning plaques and monuments may have to be removed, relocated or given additional context.

If they can believe in an invisible man with magical powers, then they can be made to believe anything.

[baggiebird1] 09/5/2021 09:11

Interestingly what isn't being reported is the majority of scotland voted for pro union parties. SNP got more seats as their vote isn't split.

Tax rises and higher govt borrowing. Already pay more tax up here only it'll be more risky to lend to Scotland than UK so borrowing costs will be higher.

It's not independence when you want to rejoin eu and give back powers and more ....it's only about being in power. They gave 16 yr olds the vote to try and swing it

[portside1] 08/5/2021 22:01

It appears it is so .have we all been fooled by the board of barcs

[portside1] 08/5/2021 22:00

Was the buyback a set up by the bod for bramson to sell its stake in the bank was the buying of shares all those of Sherborne ,It's appears that it is the same amount of shares to within 1%

[johnwise] 08/5/2021 21:39

Nicola Sturgeon hasn't yet told us where the money is coming from to sustain an independent Scotland..

Nicola, No majority, no referendum.

'It's the will of the country': Nicola Sturgeon warns Boris Johnson not to stand in the way of a new Scottish independence referendum in a direct challenge to the Prime Minister as the SNP wins the Scottish election but FAILS to achieve a majority

[johnwise] 08/5/2021 21:37

Musk is just playing. Is he showing the absurdity of his wealth on purpose? It does fit with what little I know about him. Cheap clothes and all that.