Member Info for big-blue

Oooops, wrong one, ha, it was Amol Rajan not Justin Webb - thought something was wrong as I typed. Still, the interview was very heavy handed, Amol Rajan is a Cambridge hack, so still from a breeding ground of leftie tory hating broadcasters. I hope he gets a good wrist slapping for that kind of interviewing. It serves nobody and whilst it might be the style of the US it has no place here.

Justin Webb, oh dear, got a bit carried away on R4 this morning. Effectively accused Boris of killing over hundred thousand people and the future inquiry is of no consequence to anybody. Bit of research shows this recently new presenter is an old lag of the LSE, a breeding ground for nearly all leftie tory hating broadcasters the BBC has supplied to the broadcasting community.

small market reaction, more like halting the existing decline.

Meanwhile the BBC have Cummings leveraging against Boris as hard as possible. Book deal may not have gone through so round two for Cummings, ramp it up as far as possible. It turns out there was some debates and discussions going on behind the scenes about whether or not lockdown was good or bad. WOW! Mega revelation! Will somebody give Cummings his million quid or whatever it is he is pitching for and get him off the air and consign him to the flipping book review pages of the Sundays please!

Load factor down from 72 to 66 % but a shift of flights from UK to EU, the forward project to be 60% of 2019 schedule. That isn't too bad but I don't think enough to cause any selling spike for me. Of note is the comments on forward selling being reduced across the board due to the shifting sands of quarantine.

I would imagine IAG will be following similar business models so I will extrapolate that IAG cash burn will have been similarly reduced. Not so easy for BA to switch its routes away from UK to be more intra EU, but IAG does have EU based planes so there is a good change IAG will be reporting a similar growth.

By far the most important point is that there is cash flow, fast rising cash flow, against reduced costs. If IAG are replicating Easy J and vice versa then airlines that survive without having relied on large government bailouts are going to be leaner and much more efficient.

Looks like there isn't grounds for a decoupling of sp as I keep hoping for, future is orange (lol - get it?) and it is just about sitting on hands if locked in on a share and wait for the other government numpties to realise the virus can not be stopped, we've got to live with it and if people do not take advantage of the vaccines then the rest of the population must no longer be inconvenienced. On that basis it will be in to September before we get movement towards proper full opening up. The states is going to stall. The media over there is very Biden friendly so locking out free travel is not going to get the scrutiny it deserves and the Whitehouse will feel no pressure to change things if they are not receiving negative coverage. It's all about the vanity.

bad call fugazi. 1st September is a long way off, I hope Teddy keeps a copy of your post. One of you will reproducing it in a few weeks time :)

Easy Jet is much more a provider in the EU compared to BA. SO if the load factor shoots up point to point within the EU, then the uncoupling from BA, IAG, I hope will finally happen.

HOWEVER, god only knows what new spanner will be thrown into the engine though. It might be more prudent for me to take a spike but with a loss and stay out of a sector which is just being abused and sabotaged by governments. We clearly are not, have not, been given the full picture on many angles.

I noted today one or two shops I visited, about 50/50 mask wearing in the DIY store, about 80/20 not wearing in the post office local shop. It seems that despite a north Korean standard broadcast troll event to impose mask wearing on people, it is being dumped at a fast and rapid rate. GOOD. In a couple of weeks watch the numbers fall.

Meanwhile, nightclubs - covid passports - the faint heart do gooding liberals have been kicked into touch, for now!

I am looking for the stats for the last couple of weeks based on the EU supposedly opening up to internal travel with their covid passport. Earlier numbers might be glossed over. A long shot but might just be an opportunity to break out even and stock the dry powder for the IAG switcheroo.

The sabotaging of the industry has been a great success. Without central coordination form the WHO, moving from stopping the spread of covid to living with covid, is going to be a messy long drawn out affair. At least the UK has decided to jump first. In many ways it should be a significant benefit. Unfortunately others elsewhere will not see it any favourable light. Europe will use the situation to maximise negativity towards the UK, the US from the last travel update is clearly not on board - although what is happening internally is anybodies guess as many states have been going it alone. We may find some opening up long haul elsewhere.

There were some bad comments from the EU mouthpieces the other day against the Astra vaccine, retaliatory voices against the change of amber status for France. The EU is still a long way behind and there are people actually claiming that the spread if the Indian variant is all down to the UK. I feared this would happen and the EU would come after the UK for compensation. There may be political retaliation with free access, open skies policy withdrawal and so on.

One thing for sure is the end of the covid pandemic is growing into a very ugly mess and for those expecting to hold IAG for the longer term for a return, your wish looks like it has been granted. I've done very well out of it. What I have invested in this sector should be in safe hands without any possible rights and insolvency issues, but I'll be locked in for a while. Looks like the cruise might have to wait until winter or beyond.

Hay ho!

"or as described in the Telegraph article a red hearing."

should read

or as described in the Telegraph article a comfort blanket.

"It’s infuriating because these same anti-vaccers were the same people complaining about the economy being closed and vehemently refused to wear masks. "

They are two very different groups. The masks have no impact and this has become increasingly apparent of recent months and is now very obvious. Masks are a red hearing or as described in the Telegraph article a red hearing. They most likely facilitate the spread through touching and then surfaces. The anti-vaccers are a totally different group of people. They deserve all that is coming to them. The initial denial of covid passports on human rights issues is rapidly falling apart as more and more countries look to them as a way to stop higher probability spreaders into the community gatherings. Should have been introduced months ago.

Don't confuse anti-vaccers from people raising the failings of masks. You would be very wide of the mark.

"With masks now not mandatory, the virus will spread much more easily. "

Except.... as proven in a significant Danish study, there is no statistical significance with and without mask wearing and it has been known for a long time there has been no correlation between increased spreading where mask wearing is not mandatory and mandatory (esp in the US). Indeed globally, non correlational has been shown.

The mask lobby and those who like to think they are socially superior by wearing a mask are going to be increasingly isolated over the next few weeks, especially as the two week incubation period passes and we see a fall off in numbers in England over the start of August but not in places that continue mandatory wearing such as Scotland.

Only when the source of spreading is removed, the masks, will numbers drop and hence restrictions on travel be removed. It is utterly incredible and stupid that this situation ever came about given the blatant evidence coming in right around the world, but the WHO nailed it's colours to the mask and vanity vanity vanity, nobody has the courage to stand up and admit it was a wrong policy. I can sit and wait for the sp to recover and still make a fair wedge on this but a lot of people will have to die while the prevarication accepting the masks are bad carries on.

"Oh Lord , what fools these mortals be!"

If enough people take the option and are allowed to conduct their business without wearing a mask, and are careful to wash their hands after coming into contact with any surface in a public place, then in a couple of weeks you will see a decline in cases, which will accelerate. It will depend on how many people dump the mask and how strong shops enforce wearing, but we should see a clear difference in rates of infection compared to Scotland which keeps the mask mandatory. So in about two weeks and then over the next two weeks with a decline in England and an increase in Scotland, the real truth will be there for all to see. This utterly numptie policy which has killed tens of thousands of people will come to and end.

Oh dear, market sentiment is firming up, there will be no liberation in the travel sector until late summer/early autumn. Stocks are resetting back to the level when the vaccine was announced. The opening up of the world with a vaccine at hand has been utterly botched. The hesitation and delay having a covid passport and the political foot dragging accepting one is the main issue. And there is still a slavish belief that somehow the spread of the virus can be controlled when it simply cannot. The position in September will be no different than it is today wrt to how the virus spreads. This is a pan-global botch and Trump was 100% correct, the WHO is not fit for purpose. It is providing no leadership and is rife with factional infighting and political posturing. What a mess, and this is reflected in the sp as we see further drops. My earlier hope that rumour mills would help the odd spike here and there and I think wiped out now. Market has been smelling a monumental ****-up over the last few weeks and nothing in the flip flopping easily malleable government policy and WHO policy is changing that. Sit on hands for ANOTHER month.

again, 70%, how do you know? It depends what is charged for the seat. In Theory, 1 seat could pay for flight and 100% full could make a substantial loss. I think you are confusing load factor. To repeat the same misleading point despite being corrected does show you have a very a active deramp agenda.

I will not be buying any stock in RMS.

I am well aware of the posts placed here ramping the stock. There are a myriad of companies all touting products they believe are the answer 'to the question'.

I am very open minded. Do I see a market for forced mask wearing going forward? No. There may be markets within certain areas such as hospitals, but this is not an area I wish to invest in. So I don't know where am I not being 'open-minded'. There are many stocks and sectors I do not invest in or even consider. Not investing in a stock others want to ramp does not make me closed-minded. Good luck with your investment with RMS, I don't know what the regulatory requirements are for their use or the materials used, what the competition is like, what new products are being developed to compete elsewhere.

"https://apple.news/A2Pu4-hNgSr-ea3Vc8mSvbg

Most masks do **** basically lol"

Pray this is finally the beginning of the end for masks.

""Once a particle is not on a biological surface it is no longer a biomedical issue, it is simply about physics. The public has only a partial view of the story if information only comes from one type of source. Medics have some of the answers but not a whole view."

"However, other studies have cast doubt on their effectiveness. A subsequent Danish study involving 6,000 people concluded that there was no statistical difference in infection spread in non-wearers, while data on US states with non-mandated usage failed to show a correlated uptick in cases.

"The public were demanding something must be done, they got masks, it is just a comfort blanket," Dr Axon noted. "But now it is entrenched, and we are entrenching bad behaviour.

"All around the world you can look at mask mandates and superimpose on infection rates, you cannot see that mask mandates made any effect whatsoever."

I could have written this myself, I didn't but this stuff has been known about for a long time. And my reference that I produced the other day is also quoted here. It was a highly significant study with significant results.

Now this article, which is brief and to the point does not mention the mask to surface, surface to third person, route. Because this part is some huge and massive, I wonder whether this is a teaser article put out to test the response to move towards stopping mask use altogether without needing to address the biggest issue that the masks spread rather than stop the spread of the disease.

For the sake of all our portfolios, I really hope that this is finally the outing that has been needed for many months and these stupid masks can be removed and THEN the spread of the virus will drop off since there will be reduced surface contact distribution. Hand and surface washing on a very frequent basis is the key to reduce the spread. We'll see if this is picked up across the media in the coming days. I am very sure there are some documentaries in early-production and commissioning editors are being lobbied to commission and bring forward broadcast slots. It doesn't matter where, one aired it will be impossible to keep it silent, dare I say it will go viral!!

last clutch at the straw Evil? UCL with hons then Cranfield MSc. You still don't say which part of the arts your phd was in. And as for sunsurfer, he suffers from closed-mind syndrome. Only hears positive reinforcement feedback to confirm his own opinion.

Until free travel resumes, these sp are vulnerable to U turns as seen last week. To open up travel we have to stop casing the infection numbers and focus on reducing the impact of being infected. But whilst the infection numbers are being traced we have to ask how is it being transmitted. All options must be on the agenda. All variables must be constantly reviewed. Policies must be changed and adjusted to suite.

One common parameter through the second and third wave has been persistent mask wearing. It has not stopped the spread. It is not doing so at the moment. People in close proximity are masked NOW, it is not working. There is another transmission route, contaminated mask to surface to third person. This must be brought out into the open and discussed. Is the contaminated mask route 10, 20, 100, 500 times more likely to pass on the virus through contaminated surfaces compared to any air borne contagion? It must be explored openly and it must be put on the agenda no matter who loses face or however large the embarrassment of some leading voices might be. Trump has gone and nobody is going to broadcast he was right to resist, nobody will ever broadcast it so FOT, Fear of Trump should not stop this essential debate.

Remove the masks, remove the surface contamination route, reduce the rate of spread, vaccines reduce the harm form contracting, pandemic over, sp return to pre covid levels.

Put it another way. You want to get rid of me posting on here? Great. Everyone who wants to see the back of me, get on to all the news desks of all the main news channels, here and in the US, all the main newspapers and documentary production companies like Diverse and beg them to investigate whether masks are actually part of the problem and not the solution.

I recognise one name off that list, but I am not claiming to be the son of god, I don't believe in gods so not sure what your gain is there. I think you are attempting to label and compartmentalise me into a group for others to jeer at. Interesting insight into how you perceive society works. A load of simple minded easily led supplicants to your directive.
"That one over there, that one, hate him, despise him. reject him, ostracise him. Under no circumstances listen to him."
And you believe your social superiority means you can see the real world, they can't and may only survive with your guidance because you are just so much better than they are. In my experience, even the truly uneducated have the ability to sift through the crap they are fed and able to form very clever coherent judgments. I've been around enough academics over the years to not trust them until they have been properly challenged. Money. FOLLOW THE MONEY!

I have read in great detail the full history of publications, articles, letters and mass media stories following this debacle from the outset. As I pointed out, the vast majority of so called scientific data that you wish to cite is not peer reviewed (that hasn't been time for a lot of it), is anecdotal but presented by someone apparently with scientific qualification, is a rouse amongst many to illicit funding - something you will be well aware of with your phd although you do not say in what field. The reason why the paper is so important is because it has such a large sample and the extent of follow ups. It may well contradict the less well populated studies and indeed may question the validity of the current group think consensus. Breaking that with real world information with a high confidence interval against the 'community' is par for the course in academia because there are so many lazy money grabbing so called scientists out there who do nothing more than jump on the nearest gravy train to raise grants that ultimately fund there expenses paid life styles. There is very little dependable research out there on this subject which raises the question where did the WHO, get there so qualification from. If YOU cared to follow the events you will know of the factions within the WHO fighting it out where the WHO was resistant for some time to recommending masks for the precise reason I have made that they are a tool for spreading. The scales were tipped due to the external posturing re-Trump and withdrawing funding. The original problem the WHO had with recommending masks remains. It did not go away. No so many have put their name to it, back tracking is a significant vanity issue. That too is a trait you should be familiar with. As for my self, I have two degrees, one in physics and turned down fully paid phd offers from rocket science to nuclear science.

For some people, who just do not want to hear an alternative argument in the first place, it is very inconvenient when they are called out. You may not want to confronted with evidence, strong real world evidence, that directly contradicts what you have chosen to believe. The mark of an intelligent person is the ability to take on board new information and change their position. Like you, there are far too many people around who have become intolerant of the existence of others who do not agree with them. Instead you expect to simply turn it off with a flick of the switch with your reputation intact. Sweep it under the carpet, ignore it, filter it, pretend it doesn't exist. Well it does and unless this is raised then we are in perpetual lockdown forever. Everybody witnessed the backlash when it was announced all lockdown rules were to end. The mask wearing lobby pulled every string and had every bully rolling tactic put into play on the airwaves, in print and online so that now we end up with a continuation of this killer policy.

Evil. "The more people in a community that wear a mask, the statistical likelihood of being exposed to a high enough viral load is decreased exponentially"
And where is your reference? You don't have one because such a real world study doesn't exist that shows this. As for the caveats on the data, you clearly have never had anything to do with research before. These are standard notes in papers to describe the boundaries due to whatever method is used - standard blurb from which a CI, confidence interval, is derived in order to estimate whether the data from compliant subjects is large enough to derive any pattern. The CI is 95% which is more than high enough to make conclusions from the sample size. The people in the study were in a mask wearing environment, day to day in the real world. The level of contracting the disease between people who wear a mask or not in a mask wearing environment was statistical insignificant. There is no way out of that. This is a real world study with real people in a real world environment. People wearing masks around the control group did not stop the infecting of the control group and the people wearing the masks did not have any additional protection. It was proven quite clearly that mask wearing in both directions had not practical benefit in either preventing the spread or contracting the disease. There is no way to twist it or wriggle out of it.

If as you claim in your unreferenced exponential decrease claim, the control group, would have have a very much lower and statistically significant lower rate of contraction since they were in the environment of social distancing and mask wearers in Denmark, it was not a laboratory experiment, it was a real world experiment. So the mask wearers around both groups are exhaling the virus at both groups but the control groups is still contracting the disease.

Cherry picking studies to suite my own argument? There is very little research out there ans a lot of what is cited is anecdotal and used as a basis to conduct research. Yet the WHO is supposed to have based its policy of science research. It didn't. It was based on people described as scientist presenting rhubarb, rhubarb, rhubarb, rhubarb, presentations trying to be knowledgable rather than saying, "We don't know" and losing status. The WHO selected what it needed to impose a policy to suite the anti-Trump politics of the time. There was never evidence that mask wearing prevents the spread of the virus and now that actual real world studies are being done the proof in real world numbers is being shown. It is no wonder there is no reference to this research has been made publicly. So many politicians and media have promoted mask wearing, not least because initially it was an anti-Trump stunt, and they have all been re-quoting each other that is was all based on science it will be a major scandal they knowingly were broadcasting false information and why.