Member Info for big-blue

fordm, in the same way the experts have used the pandemic to exercise political positions, lockdown control, SA bigotry, it will be revealed I suspect that they have used the pandemic to conduct mass experiments through testing. They clearly convinced the political community that testing was the answer. In fact, all that testing has had little to no impact on the spread of all the variants, and indeed no impact at all holding back omicron. Data to say delta rate of spread was reduced allowing health systems to cope is not shown. All the testing has done is give data streams for the expert advisors to make graphs out of. They have had unprecedented access to actual force compliance to take part in a study. This may turn out to be the biggest invasion of civil liberties in the end, forced participation in trials and test studies that would never influence the spread of covid. All testing with omicron is meaningless except for data for research papers. Instead of volunteer samples to work with as they usually have they have been able to spook and mislead ignorant politicians worldwide to offer up billions of people to be forced to take part. Ethically, this is a real stinker. But will it be referenced in the enquiry?

It shows, Bobbins, one must be careful which buttons one presses on ones calculator. A number on here talk about how they part deal chunks of their holdings rather than all in all out. If those people are using spreadsheets or their own formula, they will be well aware of being very pedantic and consistent in the calculation method.

But it was a useful exercise in maths for some, as an alarming number of people seem to struggle with the definition of profit!

Try this bobbins to calculate how rich you are,
142 x 100% =

Tap that into your calculator, don't forget the %, sit back and wipe the tear from your eye when you see what you now have!!

Beware the detail! Whilst it will be one small step to remove the pre-departure test, the giant lead for travel is the day 2 test because you have to go into quarantine until you get a negative PCR. Given the ease of catching omicron, that means you could be symptom free but in isolation for a good week or more paying a small fortune trying to get the negative PCR. If they change the rules so that you don't need to quarantine, then what is the point of a PCR to stop the spread since you will be spreading straight away. This is the mess all governments have got themselves into with testing. Trying to stop the spread of a virus is not possible, especially as infectious as omicron in mask wearing environments. BBC even raised the question of them having any efficacy at all in questioning school masks this morning.

If PCR test continue, using travellers to the UK as lab rats in a covert mass science experiment as it is now, then the impact on travel freedom will be minimal. If they really wanted to open up travel but try and reduce the spread, then a pre-flight 2 day test would be the solution stopping infected travellers entering the UK in the first place. They don't do that because they want infected people to fly so they can be tested, gnome sequenced and used in a massive science experiment.

That makes no sense.

Of note in the spectator article is the strong references to the SA data. Formally acknowledged!

Loved the article on the electric car in the most read section bottom of page. Chuckles all round.

Yes woody, for gawds sake get the context right. The ramifications for the bb are incalculable, % button not. Yikes!!!

and since the next post is number 111, I couldn't resist

Indeed, this is in fact a useful discussion. Does a 50% increase in covid patients in hospital mean the existing population has been added to, or that the existing population is the same of which a higher percentage are testing positive.

A little smoke and mirrors with the numbers can result in very damaging lockdowns. I was not surprised to hear ministers are kicking up a fuss and basically beginning to not trust some of the data and analysis. Call me a pedantic little twerp, but be grateful there are enough of me's in the cabinet doing the exact same thing as here.

I rest my case.

Longterm,
"The percentage increase calculator is a useful tool if you need to calculate the increase from one value to another in terms of a percentage of the original amount. "
That is the profit percentage increase. A close of 110 compared an opening of 100 is a profit of 10%. But what is the 'rise' from 100 to 110? 110/100=1.1 or 110%

:) I know how much you're all loving this. Do you all now have a better angle on profit?

A sp prediction form very early 2021 pre Delta and everything else. And what were the other predictions of the time? Why just this one? Defensive to the point of psychotic.

Well done malkis, you're getting it. Now, which one is a profit, and which one is a 'rise'? Or are you going to refer to your comrades and claim they are the same and 'we know what he meant'?

142x 11% = 15.62

Just checked on the calculator.

A PROFIT of 111% makes 300, a PROFIT - not a rise. to raise 142 to 300 can only be done mathematically by raising it 211%, you can ADD 111% profit to 142 and get the same answer, but that is not what VP said, or implied, or inferred, or 'meant'.

You can exit by kidding your self if you go retrospective and change VPs statement to actually have menat profit, if that is how you save face, that is up to you. But the maths is pure, absolute and uncontestable. A profit is not the same as a rise no matter how you twist it.

""To get to your 300p price prediction big-blue the current IAG share price would need to rise 111%""

These are the actual words. Now, walk through it. The current sp is 142. 'rise' that by 111% and you get ???????
You get 142 x1.11 = 157.

There is no ifs or buts about it. That is the 'rise'

Now if VP was as informed as he wanted everybody to believe in his big slam dunk of Big Blue, he would have said
"To get to your 300p price prediction big-blue the current IAG share price would need A PROFIT OF 111%"

rise and profit are NOT the same thing. It is that plain and simple. I can understand you all wanting to score the brownie points but you are trying to massage VPs clear statement to mean something else in retrospect. Now I spotted straight away what he did because I tapped it into the calculator 'verbatim' from his post and, of course, didn't get the magic 300.

It is valiant of you to try and dig VP out of the hole he created. But the facts are the facts. He meant profit but didn't say profit. That's all folks.

bobbins, Hexham is top dog showing people how to calculate profit. But, what was VP saying? It wasn't profit. My maths is 111% correct. A rise from 142 to 300 is 211%, check it on a calculator. Then use profit formula to verify that is a profit of 111%, not a rise, but a profit. Perhaps many of you have become so versed in profit margins, the finer points of keeping an eye on the mathematics is not needed. But it is important, or the bridge falls down or the reactor goes critical!

What did he 'do' Hexham. Do enlighten us. It looks like you are indicating some big revelation that completely deletes anything I have said on the matter. For those who, perhaps can't see it - educate them.

:)

PTOT, VP did not say PROFIT. That is the point, he said the price would have to rise from x to y by z%. If he had said, that 142 to 300 would represent a profit of 111%, then fine. There would be no issue. But a 'rise' is a different thing. It was a careless phrase form VP and I have had a little fun calling him out on it. Hexham gave us a formula, which is for profit. Some might say a bit pedantic, but if people are going to put numbers up to prove their point, like putting up a reference, they need to be carefull. Today, more people will have learned about this apparent subtle difference and the significant impact on the numbers. Profit is not a term to be substituted. Never used the term 'uplift' in financial terms. An uplift is 'an uplift in the economy of 3%', that would indicate a gain, and there read over as a profit.

Hardly! A rise in the sp is only expressed in terms of profit as a profit. Nobody says "I made a rise of 111% on IAG today". They may say "I made a profit of 111% when the share price rose from 142 to 300" but nobody would ever express a profit as a rise. They are two different things.

And you know it as you and the rest have suddenly realised this is about the difference between profit and explicit rise as a percentage of start value. But are you going to admit it? Of course not. Just waiting now for the insults and vile aggressive posts as an exit strategy. P R O F I T v R I S E .....

If in doubt, rewrite the english dictionary?

profit
/'pr?f?t/
Learn to pronounce
noun
1.
a financial gain, especially the difference between the amount earned and the amount spent in buying, operating, or producing something.
"record pre-tax profits"
Similar:
financial gain
gain
return(s)
payback
dividend
interest
yield
surplus
excess
gross profit
net profit
operating profit
take
killing
pay dirt
bottom line
bunce
Opposite:
loss
2.
advantage; benefit.
"there's no profit in screaming at referees from the bench"
Similar:
advantage
benefit
value
use
gain
good
avail
worth
usefulness
mileage
percentage
behoof
Opposite:
disadvantage
verb
obtain a financial advantage or benefit.
"the only people to profit from the episode were the lawyers"
Similar:
make money
make a killing
make a profit
rake it in
clean up

RISE

rise
/r??z/
Filter definitions by topic
See definitions in:
All
Angling
Law
Geography
Civil Engineering
Cooking
Medicine
Meteorology
Building
verb
1.
move from a lower position to a higher one; come or go up.
"the tiny aircraft rose from the ground"
2.
get up from lying, sitting, or kneeling.
"she pushed back her chair and rose"
Similar:
stand up
get/rise to one's feet
get up
jump up
leap up
spring up
become erect
straighten up
arise
Opposite:
sit
noun
1.
an upward movement; an instance of rising.
"the bird has a display flight of steep flapping rises"
2.
an increase in number, size, amount, or degree.
"local people are worried by the rise in crime"
Similar:
increase
hike
advance
growth
leap
upsurge
upswing
ascent
climb
jump
escalation
spiralling
improvement
amelioration

If I add 111% of profit to my stake of 142 I get 300.

If I want to know how I got there I calculate the rise, which is 211%. VP said there would have to be a rise of 111%. That only gets me to 157.

There is no mystery to it. He was expressing a profit, and used the wrong description. If he had said a profit of 111% was required, he would have been correct. But he didn't say that. I'm not answerable for his being inarticulate.