Challengethefine on 5 Live this morning

spikyone

So, having missed the other TV and radio debates this morning I caught mikerobertgreen and Paddy Troy on 5 Live just now.

Judging by comments on other threads I guess this week's practice must have improved PT's performance, as he didn't even come away with a bloodied nose. There were a few missed opportunities for the presenter and Michael to knock lumps out of PT's arguments too - for instance by re-iterating the penal nature of PPC charges when they were compared to council ones.

I also thought Michael could have answered better when asked why only 1% of people appealed to POPLA - saying that £50 or £100 isn't that much to many people so they can't be bothered (really? 99% of people?) weakens the argument badly, when the right answers are:
- these things are deliberately disguised to look like legitimate council tickets
- PPCs make it difficult to appeal by hiding POPLA codes and not being clear enough about how to appeal
- POPLA give very limited grounds for appeal on their website, that most people feel "don't apply" in their case

Of course, it was only about five minutes of discussion, but it was pretty much a no score draw from where I was sitting.

The_Deep

I also thought Michael could have answered better when asked why only 1% of people appealed to POPLA - saying that £50 or £100 isn't that much to many people so they can't be bothered (really? 99% of people?) weakens the argument badly, ...


Or could it be that half of the population are blessed with half average intelligence, which is on the low side anyway.

That is why this is called "Rip Off Britain", where Payday loan companies prosper, people pay up to twenty times the manufacturing costs for their trainers and clothes, have the most expensive railways and some of the most expensive housing in Europe.

trisontana

I thought it was broadcast on Radio 4, not Radio 5Live?

spikyone

The_Deep wrote: »

Or could it be that half of the population are blessed with half average intelligence, which is on the low side anyway.

I feel you're being a bit harsh here. People aren't paying because they're stupid - it's a simple fact that if someone tells you you've done something wrong, you automatically question yourself. It's human nature. This is even more true when the person in question is doing everything in their power to suggest they have authority. And that's without the other aspects of PPCs' dirty tricks that I mention in the first post.

On the subject of intelligence though, I'll leave you to work out the shortcomings of your grasp on statistics

@tristontana there may well have been something on Radio 4 too, but it was on 5 Live this morning. Good to see Michael publicising the campaign but I wonder how many that were previously unaware of the scam were convinced by the debate - I wasn't around to hear the listener comments afterwards.

trisontana

The Deep has a very low opinion of the general population. He was in the Diplomatic Service , don't you know, and drives a big car.

The_Deep

Indeed, I do. Perhaps because I have had more than a normal exposure to the bottom feeders and riff raff who turn up at our Embassies and Consulates abroad seeking my help.

Actually a drive a mini MPV.

bazster

spikyone wrote: »

On the subject of intelligence though, I'll leave you to work out the shortcomings of your grasp on statistics

It's perfectly possible for half the population to have half average intelligence. The formula would be this:

x = 2Z - y

where:

x = the mean intelligence of the upper half
y = the mean intelligence of the lower half
z = the average intelligence of the entire population.

Try it: supposing the population is 6, and the average intelligence is 4. You've then got three people with an average intelligence of 2 (all working for ANPR Ltd.) and plugging the numbers into the formula gives you three people with an average intelligence of 6 (we're at ParkingEye level now).

Northlakes

As an avid listener to the morning financial programs I got very used to hearing from Angela Knight of the British Bankers Association. She always gave a spiel of how honorable, hard working and self-regulating were the the high street banks.
After 2008, the LIBOR and FOREX scandals and the near collapse of the banking system history has proved my suspicions correct.

Funnily enough I got the same feeling this morning listening to Patrick Troy of the BPA defending the indefensible.

It was a bit like the old lag in court when being defended by a barrister. The implied message comes across that the old lag is a guilty as hell but I have to say these things in his defense as I'm paid to do so.

spikyone

bazster wrote: »

Try it: supposing the population is 6, and the average intelligence is 4. You've then got three people with an average intelligence of 2 (all working for ANPR Ltd.) and plugging the numbers into the formula gives you three people with an average intelligence of 6 (we're at ParkingEye level now).

We could debate discrete vs continuous data and whether intelligence follows a normal distribution, but I'm more concerned that you think PE have above-average intelligence :eek:


Edit: Incidentally, these discussions always seem to end up at Parking Eye. It's a bit like Godwin's law of PPC-world. Draw your own conclusions...

bazster

Ah well, I'm a pure mathematician not a statistician, so it's only theory that interests me, not the real world!

As for PE, it depends on how you define your population. If you take just the population of PPC employees then PE probably is above average!

hoohoo

Personally, ParkingEye's tactics do show a high degree of intelligence. They have successfully manipulated the courts, the BPA and others with a long term strategy. This didn't happen by chance.