Uh-oh ... investors abandoning gilts.

kennyboy66_2

!!!!!!? wrote: »

And how much more would they have fallen had the pound NOT devalued?

Can't confirm it but saw someone claiming that petrol would right now be approx 70p/litre if the pound was as strong as it was this time last year. Sounds about right.

Oh dear !!!!!!, it must have been a long day.

Fuel duty is about 51p (Ultra low sulpher unleaded, conventional unleaded & diesel is more again), distribution costs & retailer margin are anything between 6.5p and 10.5p a litre (can be a fair bit higher).

Add VAT on to those 2 alone and we get 67p per litre minimum.

Now if you think that they can get oil out of the ground, ship it half way round the world, refine it and make a profit - all for 3p a litre, you must know something I don't.

Or I could point out that in April 2007, oil was $68 a barrel & petrol was 92.8 p a litre.

Sterling was trading at about 1.98 US $

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/fuel/fuel-price-archive.html


I try and deal in facts rather than re-cycled news clippings and now "someones" anecdote.

ManAtHome

StevieJ wrote: »

We are not on this one again :rotfl:Imports have reduced in price, end of.

Reduction in price or quantity..?

Trade gap was up 1 billion quid over the last quarter by the way - September may be the start of a down, but could also be a few ships early or late...

kennyboy66_2

!!!!!!? wrote: »

inflation will be shortly following.

So we have given you some evidence that import prices are actually falling & that gilt yields have fallen, but despite this everything is just confirming that you are right?

I'd call it a day for today, you are starting to embarrass yourself.

StevieJ

ManAtHome wrote: »

Reduction in price or quantity..?

Trade gap was up 1 billion quid over the last quarter by the way - September may be the start of a down, but could also be a few ships early or late...

Despite the drop in sterling over the month, import prices – which rise with a weaker pound – fell by 2.3 per cent between September and October. In addition, producers reduced the price of food for the first time in 17 months.

kennyboy66_2

ManAtHome wrote: »

Reduction in price or quantity..?

Trade gap was up 1 billion quid over the last quarter by the way - September may be the start of a down, but could also be a few ships early or late...

Read the article.

IMPORT PRICES FELL BY 2.3% IN THE MONTH.

Sorry to shout.

It points to how bad things are.

Dithering_Dad

Is !!!!!! making a show of himself again? Oh dear.

It was all going so well for him in here when it was just !!!!!! spouting rubbish and his ill-educated sycophants applauding his every word.

Now that more sensible people have arrived, everyone is seeing right through him. Oh well, I guess he can still rely on carolt, etc al to stick up for him.

epz_2

isnt it blindingly obvious that people buy less stuff in a recession so imports go down, likewise the same happens in other countries.

the balance of payments is the important bit

StevieJ

epz wrote: »

isnt it blindingly obvious that people buy less stuff in a recession so imports go down, likewise the same happens in other countries.

the balance of payments is the important bit

Despite the drop in sterling over the month, import prices – which rise with a weaker pound – fell by 2.3 per cent between September and October. In addition, producers reduced the price of food for the first time in 17 months.
Thanks to Kenny
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/db6b0fe8-afd7-11dd-a795-0000779fd18c.html?nclick_check=1

WTF?_2

StevieJ wrote: »

Despite the drop in sterling over the month, import prices – which rise with a weaker pound – fell by 2.3 per cent between September and October. In addition, producers reduced the price of food for the first time in 17 months.

Well there you go - at this rate food might be as cheap as it was a year ago (before it went through the roof) at some indeterminate point in the future.

Meanwhile - what does that have to do with the subject of the thread which was the fact that investors show signs of walking away from future Sterling bond sales - rather putting the governments 'borrow and spend' policy into a bit of a pickle?

This isn't a competition of who can post the bear-iest or bull-iest news - it's a discussion and it seems that the moment you see your dogmatic viewpoint being challenged you must try to change the subject rather than discuss or provide a relevant counterpoint.

Moon_Boi

So, if investors are not buying Guilts, where is the "smart" money going?