Member Info for fleccy

"Good to see further analysis confirms the P3 results in USA"

I have memories, from last year, of headlines stating that the AZN vaccine 100% prevented severe illness, which is the most important thing in my opinion. I'm not into conspiracy theories, and believe that NASA really did put a man on the moon, but I also believe that the AZN vaccine has been reputationally damaged intentionally. The reasons AZN has been trashed may be financial, nationalistic, or both. My view that skulduggery has happened, comes from the concerted attacks from various different quarters. I've never seen so much criticism aimed at something supplied on a non profit basis. We've had politicians, medical professionals, health agencies, all taking chunks out of the AZN vaccine, and the company. The US have held back the AZN vaccine authorisation, ensuring that Pfizer and Moderna would be the main providers in the US, and the US are now talking about giving the AZN vaccine away to Mexico and Canada. AZN must feel shell shocked, they have been placed in position comparable to Rorke's Drift, with Zulu's on all sides, I could have said the Alamo too, but everyone died there.
Where are things now? A US trial carried out under strict conditions returns an efficacy of 76%, preventing severe illness and hospitalisation by 100%, confirming preliminary data from last year. All of this makes the antagonists look foolish, not AZN. Hopefully history will shine a light on the shenanigans that have taken place. The real truth is that the AZN vaccine, could have vaccinated the whole world at a fraction of the costs associated with the MRNA Vaccines.

"(Bloomberg) -- A stock of 29 million doses of the AstraZeneca Plc vaccine is ready for export to the U.K. at an Italian plant, according to a report by Italian daily La Stampa."

https://www.bloombergquint.com/onweb/astra-may-hold-29-million-vaccine-doses-in-italy-la-stampa-says

"The 29 million doses of vaccine thus discovered do not fail to raise many questions, when we know that AstraZeneca only delivered 30 million doses to Europeans this quarter, while the laboratory had committed to supplying them. three more time. Who are these stocks for? The 27 want precise answers from the lab.
It is possible that some of these doses are indeed reserved for the EU, and only awaiting final tests, but Brussels also suspects that part of it is intended for export. The UK has let it be known that it is counting on AstraZeneca produced on the continent for its vaccination campaign"

https://www.en24news.com/now/2021/03/29-million-doses-of-astrazeneca-discovered-in-italy-brussels-demands-explanation.html

"EU Offering U.K. Just a Fraction of Astra’s Dutch Vaccine Output"

https://www.bloombergquint.com/onweb/eu-offering-u-k-just-a-fraction-of-astra-s-dutch-vaccine-output

All this proves that Globalisation is an illusion. It's pretty clear that countries should become self sufficient for their own national security. Countries, like the UK, have allowed manufacturing, and food production to be outsourced internationally, on the understanding that contracts will be upheld under all, but the most extreme, circumstances. You don't hear much about "fairness" when manufacturing plants are built in the Eurozone during the good times.
What's clear, is that the EU haggled on price and compromised on contract detail, so now they are threatening to enact wartime legislation to pull back the UK vaccination pace, because the UK did something right making the EU look bad. The vaccine debacle proves that Globalisation is unsustainable, with self sufficiency being the way forward.
Looks as though the EU are adding sour Grapes to their export list.

I can't vouch for the accuracy of these articles, but I can't remember any mainstream headlines shouting about the MRNA vaccine deaths.

"The deaths of 16 elderly people in Switzerland after being inoculated with Pfizer and Moderna COVID-19 vaccines underscore the potential danger of mRNA vaccines to the age group, Chinese vaccine experts said, further calling for caution.
At least 16 people died after receiving vaccines in Switzerland, the Swiss Agency for Therapeutic Products (Swissmedic) was quoted as saying by Sputnik in a report on Saturday."

https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202102/1216777.shtml

"Seven out of 31 people living in the nursing home died after getting injected with their first dose of Pfizer's COVID-19 vaccine. The whistleblower added that after the second dose was administered, one died and eleven more got seriously sick."

http://www.christianitydaily.com/articles/11054/20210305/covid-vaccination-resulting-in-significant-number-of-deaths-serious-injuries-in-german-nursing-home-whistleblower-reveals.htm

"Doctors in Norway have been told to conduct more thorough evaluations of very frail elderly patients in line to receive the Pfizer BioNTec vaccine against covid-19, following the deaths of 23 patients shortly after receiving the vaccine."

https://www.bmj.com/content/372/bmj.n149

"They can trash it all they like ,it works and no amount of scare mongering is going to stop it."

Very true. I'm not invested in AZN, but I resent the treatment of the Vaccine and the company. All of this does nothing to dent AZN financially, as the vaccine is being produced on a non profit basis. Where AZN could do well, going forward, is with the booster vaccinations for dealing with new variants, which wont be at cost. As far as booster jabs, AZN will have an automatic advantage over the MRNA vaccines due to the ease of transport and storage, giving them a much larger market.

"It is usually done in private, so this is unprecedented in my opinion."

The fact that the action by the NIH is described as "unprecedented" reinforces the view around a collective strategy to trash the AZN Vaccine. Why did the NIH release this "unprecedented" statement? What vested interest do they have, maybe a nationalistic interest, or maybe a financial interests in rival vaccines, who knows?

"The recent Scottish data suggested Oxford jab equal in efficacy to Pfizer. Blood clot incidence tiny and again equal between both jabs. One jab at least 5x more expensive, and difficult to store"

But there's no money to be made in the AZN vaccine, unlike others!!!!!!!!!!!!

You can be sure they wouldn't have trashed the Moderna, or Pfizer trial data, if they were unsure about the results. The AZN/Oxford vaccine is clearly safe and has good efficacy. The dogs are unleashed internationally every time AZN has positive press, and it poses the question, is this intentional? Since the AZN vaccine is the only non profit one, cheapest, most easily stored, and manufactured in bulk. Big money is being generated by Pfizer and Moderna, both US companies with vaccines that require very careful handling. Should the AZN/Oxford vaccine have received good press from the start, and received rapid authorisation in the US, would Moderna/Pfizer have been as successful in their rollouts? Is it really a conspiracy theory, to say that big money may be behind the trashing of the AZN vaccine, since the cheapest and most easily transported vaccine out there seems to have a target on it?
Being the cynic, that I am, my personal opinion is that the AZN vaccine has been intentionally trashed, with the intention of helping Pfizer and Moderna. Funny how the only vaccine produced on a non profit basis, is the one that gets Flak everywhere. There's a deafening silence around anything Moderna, or Pfizer, and it makes me wonder.

It has also occurred to me that HAP's and satellites could compliment each other, with HAP's reducing the number of satellites required to offer services to Shipping and Aircraft. Maybe the UK Government should use OneWeb satellites in conjunction with HAP's to offer a more tailored service, rather than putting thousands of satellites in orbit.

"We need Jansen to milk the government too if they are giving out free cash for low orbit satellites. Any hype would help the SP, markets get excited on crazy stuff. If starlink could truly replace OR then Bt won’t be able to issue new bonds."

Because the UK has a relatively small surface area, and has good infrastructure, HAP's would suit the UK better than Low Orbit Satellite trains in my opinion. Whereas you could probably cover most of the Scottish Highlands with several HAP's, you'd need a continues Train of satellites around the planet. Granted a Satellite train will cover an entire latitude, but do the UK need to be a part of that? Satellite economics may work on a global scale, but HAP's give more national control and security. Personally, I think HAP's make far more sense than tens of thousands of satellite's orbiting the planet.

https://sa.catapult.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/16-High-Altitude-Platform-Communications.pdf

If they were going to use non terrestrial communication, then HAP's make more sense than Low Orbit Satellites imo.

"Since HAPS operate at much lower altitudes than satellites, it is possible to cover a small region much more effectively. Lower altitude also means much lower telecommunications link budget (hence lower power consumption) and smaller round-trip delay compared to satellites. Furthermore, deploying a satellite requires significant time and monetary resources, in terms of development and launch. HAPS, on the other hand, are comparatively less expensive and are rapidly deployable. Another major difference is that a satellite, once launched, cannot be landed for maintenance, while HAPS can."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atmospheric_satellite

It doesn't mention SpaceX, or Starlink.

"Call for evidence on using satellite and 5G technology to connect very hard to reach areas"

"This could lead to the government encouraging industry to use new wireless equipment, low-orbit satellites or high altitude platforms to beam faster connections to far-flung homes and businesses.
The government has already made investments in wireless, satellite and hybrid-fibre technologies, and continues to explore emerging technologies in this area. Some of these technologies are also gigabit-capable and eligible for UK Gigabit Programme funding today."

If they were going to use satellite, which I think is a bad idea, they would likely use OneWeb, not Starlink. Unless I missed something in the text. They also mention high altitude platforms, which could be aircraft, or airships lol.

We've discussed Satellite arrays before, but I struggle to understand the the logic behind the technology. Starlink plans to put between 4400 and 12000 satellites in low orbit. Granted the satellites are small, but if there's a collision, explosion, or whatever, shrapnel could fly off in all directions, much of it travelling fast and in the same orbit as the array, some crossing other arrays. I know that this has been looked at, but if something can go wrong it usually does. It'll be an interesting one to look back on, a decade, or two, from now.

Interesting, but to be taken with a large pinch of salt in my opinion. A couple of things that would make this highly unlikely:

1) The UK has invested half a Billion pounds in OneWeb, why would they subsidise Starlink?
2) The speeds offered would be nowhere near speeds offered by Fibre.
3) Uplink/Downlinks would be subject to atmospheric fading, leading to slow and intermittent service in bad weather.

It would likely be a false economy, you could just as easily cover the UK remote areas with 5G, and just Fibre to the cell, but you'd still suffer the same atmospheric issues as a Starlink service, but the cost should be cheaper than using low orbit satellites with a limited lifespan.
As you can probably gather, I'm not a great fan of RF solutions, for providing data connectivity, due to many years of working with Line of sight Microwave systems. During heavy rain, which we get a lot of in the UK, you get reflections, scattering, and attenuation of microwave signals, so microwave has limitations. It will be interesting to see how Starlink's Beta trials go, but bear in mind there are only a limited number of users. Time will tell how satellite arrays will cope with thousands of users, all affected by blanket bad weather. Satellite arrays may have third world uses, where infrastructure is non existent and thousands of villages are spread out over millions of square KM's, but not the UK. I could see the Democratic Republic of Congo having a use for Satellite arrays, with the population sparsely spread across 2.345 million square km. Might as well just fibre out the whole of the UK and use 5G cell, or Drone tech in the interim.

"Investment trusts using debt to make big bets on British recovery"

"Trust managers, particularly ones who follow the “value” style of investing, have gone on a debt-fuelled buying spree, picking up out-of-favour shares that are trading cheaply relative to earnings."

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/investing/funds/investment-trusts-using-debt-make-big-bets-british-recovery/

"Just had my az vaccine... on route to the centre was on main news that EU countries are resuming the AZ vaccine roll out"

I had my AZN vaccination on the 10th March, in the morning. It came with side effects though. In the evening my face felt quite flushed and I was a bit feverish and headachy. Because of the headache I had to take some Ibuprofen around 3am, which helped me get off to sleep, but I felt tired so stayed in bed until lunch time. I still felt under the weather the following night, but took two ibuprofen around 10pm and managed to sleep through the night. I felt better the next day. I think my side effects were more on the extreme side.
I would still take the AZN vaccine over the Pfizer, or Moderna vaccinations, even with the side effects, and I'm somewhat miffed by the EU's constant criticism of the AZN/Oxford vaccine.
Apparently France are now saying they'll only recommend the AZN vaccine for over 55's, what hallucinogen are they on? First Macron implied that the AZN vaccine was quasi ineffective for over 65's, possibly over 60's, and now they are saying it's only suitable for over 55's. What sort of schizophrenic narrative are they trying to promote, going off past statements will they only give the AZN vaccine to 55 to 60 year olds?

"Housing Estates built in the 70's and early 80's the cable was buried and invariably Aluminium. Aluminium is going to be a right bugger to replace, as it's buried about 6" below the Tarmac. Openreach has now to duct and fibre whole estates to give service."

Not sure how difficult that would be, maybe the BT guys can answer that one. Properties fed via overhead cable will be easy, they could just run the Fibre overhead. If the property is fed via a buried cable and not ducted, I assume they'll take the easiest route, but there'll be a solution whatever the situation. Since this is all bread & butter stuff for Openreach, I don't see it as an issue.

"Fleccy, numerous stocks mimicking BT's chart performance since last November besides VOD"

Barclays is outperforming at the moment, unfortunately not one of my stocks lol.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vTVcbXZMg5K4jCPxaGyvtt4mxaTST2k6zT09ea3uHI5lYSXaGjmm6WrKhdVBxXxqWMb3Rwzqd8SKdQ_/pubchart?oid=1613401209&format=interactive

"Nice recovery. Zig zag as SP never linear (except on Fleccy's linear, candlestick-free charts :)"

No candlesticks required for charting the close.

"Nice recovery. Zig zag as SP never linear (except on Fleccy's linear, candlestick-free charts :)"

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vTZJfi4WWjPM24kuDjagPCEAChjrZvMHnR4pJNUiHPKY0dCiPTzNo8D4nwBgX3I-kM6D7PKnh2lzllW/pubchart?oid=987433372&format=interactive

"Does anyone have a clue on BT selling their spent copper in the future, do they leave it or outsource the contract for scrap will they earn or will it cost them"

Any answer would be speculative. Much of the underground cabling will be unrecoverable, so that will likely be left in the ground. Coaxial and multicore cabling at the redundant exchanges will be easily recoverable, as will circuit boards/electronic scrap, and will have a scrap value. Stripping out the exchanges and making good will likely cost a lot, so it will probably be a zero sum game in the end.