Premium Bond Winner ?

polymaff

eskbanker wrote: »

Not sure why this has suddenly come to the fore six weeks after being posted but if you follow the quoted link back to melbury's post #4752, you'll see that my post #4751 that he/she was referring to quoted a whole bunch of different measures of relative value from 1956 to 2017, so trying to condense it down to a single number kinda misses the point....

Oh, the irony.

farrukhnawaz

The premium bond trademark, if your theory was correct, ministerial heads might roll. The cabinet, and especially the Prime Minister in waiting, have nothing to gain & everything to lose by any such deception.

polymaff

farrukhnawaz wrote: »

The premium bond trademark, if your theory was correct, ministerial heads might roll. The cabinet, and especially the Prime Minister in waiting, have nothing to gain & everything to lose by any such deception.

Hint for a newbie: Make it clear who "your" is meant to refer to.

Usually done by clicking the "Quote" button of the message you're responding to (just like I did to get the quote of your message).

qwert_yuiop

eskbanker wrote: »

Not sure why this has suddenly come to the fore six weeks after being posted but if you follow the quoted link back to melbury's post #4752, you'll see that my post #4751 that he/she was referring to quoted a whole bunch of different measures of relative value from 1956 to 2017, so trying to condense it down to a single number kinda misses the point....

The quote referred to is 1956 only.
Opened again after a brief comment at home about a previous poster who believed in selling and re buying his bonds repeatedly as “new bonds always do better”.

eskbanker

qwert_yuiop wrote: »

The quote referred to is 1956 only.
Opened again after a brief comment at home about a previous poster who believed in selling and re buying his bonds repeatedly as “new bonds always do better”.

I'm not sure there's much more mileage in this but the post you picked up on wasn't about old bonds per se but was about the minimum stake required, comparing what £1 in 1956 is worth today (or rather 2016), my point being that there are a range of different ways of measuring that change in value over the 50+ years, one of which is of course RPI but that doesn't make that the right answer and others wrong!

polymaff wrote: »

Oh, the irony.

I'm beginning to think there must be crossed wires all round as I don't see the irony!

polymaff

eskbanker wrote: »

I'm beginning to think there must be crossed wires all round as I don't see the irony!

We do! :rotfl:

eskbanker

There would seem to be some easily-amused Alanis Morrissette fans in, who share her somewhat flexible and eccentric definition of 'irony'....

polymaff

Ah, now you return to personal disdain.

O wad some Power the giftie gie us To see oursels as ithers see us!

eskbanker

polymaff wrote: »

Ah, now you return to personal disdain.

O wad some Power the giftie gie us To see oursels as ithers see us!

A 'lousy' comeback, preparing for next week maybe?

Of course if ithers had the decency not to just hide behind vagueness and snigger then it would lead to a higher quality of discourse - and before you say it, yes, I have sufficient self-awareness to know that this will also be seen as cryptic by many!

WorldTraveller_2

I'm fairly new to Premium Bonds. I've had £7k for a couple of months, and have just put another £5k in. Going to try to put more in whenever possible (also have a First Direct regular saver at 5% that I'm putting max £300 a month in, so at least guaranteed a return on that).