UK based funds - brexit and onwards

masonic

BananaRepublic said:

I missed that, looked several times too. They regularly have headline Brexit horror stories high up on on the main page, such as recently one person paying more for a coat, positive comments from Nissan should have been on the main page too. The pre Brexit warnings from Nissan were. 

I'd argue neither story should have made the front page. It basically boils down to "Nissan windbag issues scary warning then changes his mind".

The front page of most news sites, and indeed newspapers, is for sensationalism and it is best to look deeper. I use RSS feeds where possible and avoid browsing just the 'top stories'. Sadly, the average man on the street cares more about import duties on items of shopping than the fate of a car factory. Front pages reflect what people tend to click on rather than what is truly important.

BananaRepublic

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

I missed that, looked several times too. They regularly have headline Brexit horror stories high up on on the main page, such as recently one person paying more for a coat, positive comments from Nissan should have been on the main page too. The pre Brexit warnings from Nissan were. 

I'd argue neither story should have made the front page. It basically boils down to "Nissan windbag issues scary warning then changes his mind".

There were very real concerns that a hard deal would have devastated the UK car industry which is a significant part of the UK economy. Reporting that was right. 

masonic

BananaRepublic said:

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

I missed that, looked several times too. They regularly have headline Brexit horror stories high up on on the main page, such as recently one person paying more for a coat, positive comments from Nissan should have been on the main page too. The pre Brexit warnings from Nissan were. 

I'd argue neither story should have made the front page. It basically boils down to "Nissan windbag issues scary warning then changes his mind".

There were very real concerns that a hard deal would have devastated the UK car industry which is a significant part of the UK economy. Reporting that was right. 

The actual comment was: "You know we are the number one carmaker in the UK and we want to continue. We are committed. Having said that, if we are not getting the current tariffs, it's not our intention but the business will not be sustainable. That's what everybody has to understand."

It was made in June last year. It's right that those comments should have been reported. It is likely that if there was no deal and a reversion to WTO rules, it would have been pretty bad for the car industry.

But there was a follow-up story in mid-November with further comments from the Nissan COO saying effectively if a deal was not reached next week (end of November), then it would be too late to save the industry. That simply was not true and should not have been given such credibility.

The likely reason the November story made the front page is because it was basically scaremongering, and scaremongering is effective at driving clicks.

BananaRepublic

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

I missed that, looked several times too. They regularly have headline Brexit horror stories high up on on the main page, such as recently one person paying more for a coat, positive comments from Nissan should have been on the main page too. The pre Brexit warnings from Nissan were. 

I'd argue neither story should have made the front page. It basically boils down to "Nissan windbag issues scary warning then changes his mind".

There were very real concerns that a hard deal would have devastated the UK car industry which is a significant part of the UK economy. Reporting that was right. 

The actual comment was: "You know we are the number one carmaker in the UK and we want to continue. We are committed. Having said that, if we are not getting the current tariffs, it's not our intention but the business will not be sustainable. That's what everybody has to understand."

It was made in June last year. It's right that those comments should have been reported. It is likely that if there was no deal and a reversion to WTO rules, it would have been pretty bad for the car industry.

But there was a follow-up story in mid-November with further comments from the Nissan COO saying effectively if a deal was not reached next week (end of November), then it would be too late to save the industry. That simply was not true and should not have been given such credibility.

Seems reasonable to report it to me, even if the exact date was wrong. They were saying it had  to be agreed then. They and other news sites reported countless warnings from business leaders, car making was especially vulnerable due to moving so many parts to and from other EU countries.

masonic

BananaRepublic said:

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

I missed that, looked several times too. They regularly have headline Brexit horror stories high up on on the main page, such as recently one person paying more for a coat, positive comments from Nissan should have been on the main page too. The pre Brexit warnings from Nissan were. 

I'd argue neither story should have made the front page. It basically boils down to "Nissan windbag issues scary warning then changes his mind".

There were very real concerns that a hard deal would have devastated the UK car industry which is a significant part of the UK economy. Reporting that was right. 

The actual comment was: "You know we are the number one carmaker in the UK and we want to continue. We are committed. Having said that, if we are not getting the current tariffs, it's not our intention but the business will not be sustainable. That's what everybody has to understand."

It was made in June last year. It's right that those comments should have been reported. It is likely that if there was no deal and a reversion to WTO rules, it would have been pretty bad for the car industry.

But there was a follow-up story in mid-November with further comments from the Nissan COO saying effectively if a deal was not reached next week (end of November), then it would be too late to save the industry. That simply was not true and should not have been given such credibility.

Seems reasonable to report it to me, even if the exact date was wrong. They were saying it had  to be agreed then. They and other news sites reported countless warnings from business leaders, car making was especially vulnerable due to moving so many parts to and from other EU countries.

If you spin it like that, i.e. that the exact date was wrong, but the thing the warning was contingent on didn't happen, then the news that something didn't happen, therefore something dependent on that thing also didn't happen, is considerably less newsworthy. In the end though, I think all of that is irrelevant, because what keeps things on the front page is engagement from visitors.

NottinghamKnight

I thought the comments in relation to the Astra plant in Liverpool were interesting, less brexit related but stating that uk moves to EV only sales from 2030 would make it less attractive to maintain manufacturing here. Conflict between going green and cost to production.

BananaRepublic

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

I missed that, looked several times too. They regularly have headline Brexit horror stories high up on on the main page, such as recently one person paying more for a coat, positive comments from Nissan should have been on the main page too. The pre Brexit warnings from Nissan were. 

I'd argue neither story should have made the front page. It basically boils down to "Nissan windbag issues scary warning then changes his mind".

There were very real concerns that a hard deal would have devastated the UK car industry which is a significant part of the UK economy. Reporting that was right. 

The actual comment was: "You know we are the number one carmaker in the UK and we want to continue. We are committed. Having said that, if we are not getting the current tariffs, it's not our intention but the business will not be sustainable. That's what everybody has to understand."

It was made in June last year. It's right that those comments should have been reported. It is likely that if there was no deal and a reversion to WTO rules, it would have been pretty bad for the car industry.

But there was a follow-up story in mid-November with further comments from the Nissan COO saying effectively if a deal was not reached next week (end of November), then it would be too late to save the industry. That simply was not true and should not have been given such credibility.

Seems reasonable to report it to me, even if the exact date was wrong. They were saying it had  to be agreed then. They and other news sites reported countless warnings from business leaders, car making was especially vulnerable due to moving so many parts to and from other EU countries.

If you spin it like that, i.e. that the exact date was wrong, but the thing the warning was contingent on didn't happen, then the news that something didn't happen, therefore something dependent on that thing also didn't happen, is considerably less newsworthy. In the end though, I think all of that is irrelevant, because what keeps things on the front page is engagement from visitors.

Then we disagree. Regarding the last remark, they don’t get on the front page by engagement but by editorial decisions. Alastair Campbell understood well how the media works, and how to use them to manipulate public opinion. It isn’t just ‘report the news’. 

Moe_The_Bartender

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

I missed that, looked several times too. They regularly have headline Brexit horror stories high up on on the main page, such as recently one person paying more for a coat, positive comments from Nissan should have been on the main page too. The pre Brexit warnings from Nissan were. 

I'd argue neither story should have made the front page. It basically boils down to "Nissan windbag issues scary warning then changes his mind".

There were very real concerns that a hard deal would have devastated the UK car industry which is a significant part of the UK economy. Reporting that was right. 

The actual comment was: "You know we are the number one carmaker in the UK and we want to continue. We are committed. Having said that, if we are not getting the current tariffs, it's not our intention but the business will not be sustainable. That's what everybody has to understand."

It was made in June last year. It's right that those comments should have been reported. It is likely that if there was no deal and a reversion to WTO rules, it would have been pretty bad for the car industry.

But there was a follow-up story in mid-November with further comments from the Nissan COO saying effectively if a deal was not reached next week (end of November), then it would be too late to save the industry. That simply was not true and should not have been given such credibility.

The likely reason the November story made the front page is because it was basically scaremongering, and scaremongering is effective at driving clicks.

There’s nothing to stop Nissan closing Sunderland and moving production to Japan now that we have a trade deal. 

BananaRepublic

NottinghamKnight said:

I thought the comments in relation to the Astra plant in Liverpool were interesting, less brexit related but stating that uk moves to EV only sales from 2030 would make it less attractive to maintain manufacturing here. Conflict between going green and cost to production.

I’m not convinced that will happen, unless there is a significant reduction in the cost of batteries and a massive increase in charging stations. However, this might not be an issue for domestic manufacturers, 80% of cars made here are exported so there would still be a market for ICE cars, depending of course on legislation in overseas countries. 

The comment on the UK being less attractive for EV manufacturing relates to batteries. They seem to think the government should build a battery factory, which is bizarre. No-one funded Tesla to build a gigafactory in Berlin. It’s like them saying the government should fund engine manufacture. 

I don’t doubt EV’s are the future. 

masonic

BananaRepublic said:

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

masonic said:

BananaRepublic said:

I missed that, looked several times too. They regularly have headline Brexit horror stories high up on on the main page, such as recently one person paying more for a coat, positive comments from Nissan should have been on the main page too. The pre Brexit warnings from Nissan were. 

I'd argue neither story should have made the front page. It basically boils down to "Nissan windbag issues scary warning then changes his mind".

There were very real concerns that a hard deal would have devastated the UK car industry which is a significant part of the UK economy. Reporting that was right. 

The actual comment was: "You know we are the number one carmaker in the UK and we want to continue. We are committed. Having said that, if we are not getting the current tariffs, it's not our intention but the business will not be sustainable. That's what everybody has to understand."

It was made in June last year. It's right that those comments should have been reported. It is likely that if there was no deal and a reversion to WTO rules, it would have been pretty bad for the car industry.

But there was a follow-up story in mid-November with further comments from the Nissan COO saying effectively if a deal was not reached next week (end of November), then it would be too late to save the industry. That simply was not true and should not have been given such credibility.

Seems reasonable to report it to me, even if the exact date was wrong. They were saying it had  to be agreed then. They and other news sites reported countless warnings from business leaders, car making was especially vulnerable due to moving so many parts to and from other EU countries.

If you spin it like that, i.e. that the exact date was wrong, but the thing the warning was contingent on didn't happen, then the news that something didn't happen, therefore something dependent on that thing also didn't happen, is considerably less newsworthy. In the end though, I think all of that is irrelevant, because what keeps things on the front page is engagement from visitors.

Then we disagree. Regarding the last remark, they don’t get on the front page by engagement but by editorial decisions. Alastair Campbell understood well how the media works, and how to use them to manipulate public opinion. It isn’t just ‘report the news’. 

It seems like people of all political persuasions accuse the BBC of bias against their political viewpoint, so perhaps it is striking a better balance than people give it credit for. The main bone I've had to pick with its reporting is its poor handling of statistics, for example making headlines with large-looking relative numbers, while ignoring absolute numbers, which may be infinitesimal (fictitious example: odds of being hit by extinction level asteroid in 2021 up 25% on year 2020, absolute risk <0.000001%).

Moe_The_Bartender said:

masonic said:

The actual comment was: "You know we are the number one carmaker in the UK and we want to continue. We are committed. Having said that, if we are not getting the current tariffs, it's not our intention but the business will not be sustainable. That's what everybody has to understand."

It was made in June last year. It's right that those comments should have been reported. It is likely that if there was no deal and a reversion to WTO rules, it would have been pretty bad for the car industry.

But there was a follow-up story in mid-November with further comments from the Nissan COO saying effectively if a deal was not reached next week (end of November), then it would be too late to save the industry. That simply was not true and should not have been given such credibility.

The likely reason the November story made the front page is because it was basically scaremongering, and scaremongering is effective at driving clicks.

There’s nothing to stop Nissan closing Sunderland and moving production to Japan now that we have a trade deal. 

I thought the trade deal with Japan was provisional, or do you mean something else?

You are of course correct that what they say publicly does not have to match what they actually do, so saying they'd leave if we failed to reach a tariff free trade deal with the EU doesn't mean they really would have, and conversely they could leave anyway despite us having reached a satisfactory deal for them.