This is an extract from an article in today's Sunday Business Post - it's classic Michael O'Leary.
"O’Leary told the Financial Times that he would retire in three years, by which time he said Ryanair would need a different style of chief executive.
‘‘I think you need me for the rapid growth and for the in cost reduction initiatives," he said, ‘‘but once they’re all done you then need to hand over to somebody who’s a bit more respectful of politicians and bureaucrats, talks about caring about the environment and old people and f***ing jungles and fish in the sea and all that shite.""
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
What is Art?
Every Sunday morning, Miriam O’Callaghan interviews a “couple” on RTE radio. Last Sunday’s “couple” was John Sheahan & Barney McKenna of the Dubliners.
Sheahan read a poem he’d written for the deceased Ronnie Drew – the closing section was where he hoped Ronnie had finally found the answer to life’s three great imponderables: “What is life, what is art and where the fcuk is Barney?”
I thought of it last night while watching a BBC2 programme about aspiring young artists competing for the patronage of Charles Saatchi.
Basically the programme had selected 12 wannabe artists from a much larger group, this 12 to be further whittled down to 6 during the programme, who would then be given 10 weeks to produce some new artworks. The ultimate winner will have his/her piece exhibited with Saatchi’s collection and be given a studio for 3 years.
The whittling process from 12 to 6 was the subject of the programme, with each participant having to present one art work to the panel (which included Tracey Emin) and the final choice to be made by Saatchi himself.
As a little surprise the 12 contestants were asked to complete a life drawing of a nude model, which merely served to prove that none of them can actually draw. There were only 3 painters in the twelve, the rest were showing a variety of installations, mechanical devices and videos.
They then, individually, had to discuss their presentation with the panel and each was asked the simple question: “Why is this art?”. None managed a credible answer, indeed, most were genuinely flummoxed by the question.
This inability to justify didn’t seem to faze the panel – who showed a “famous” video by an “artist” called Bruce Nauman, walking bare-foot along the edge of a square marked on the floor. Nauman famously found himself suffering from “artist’s block” while sitting in his studio. Then he had a blinding revelation: “I’m an artist and, therefore, everything I create is, by definition, art”. And off he went. He’s beloved of the art community because this rationale has been the greatest “get out of jail free” gift that could ever have been given to that community.
I don’t know if this was the first of a series of programmes, but I hope there will be a follow-up. At least half the final 6 chosen appear to be utterly talentless charlatans, so my education has obviously sadly deficient and I welcome all opportunities to bridge the gaps.
One girl who made the final 6 presented a handle attached to the wall, with a referee’s whistle suspended from it. Asked to explain it she mumbled stuff about tactile feel, action of blowing the whistle etc.. Tracey Emin elaborated for her – it’s sexual blah blah. But what they particularly liked was her drawing of the nude model – an incomprehensible series of marks, squiggles etc across two large sheets of paper. The human form could not be discerned in all of this. But I know that I’m wrong, because this “drawing” also caught the approving eye of Charles Saatchi!.
Sheahan read a poem he’d written for the deceased Ronnie Drew – the closing section was where he hoped Ronnie had finally found the answer to life’s three great imponderables: “What is life, what is art and where the fcuk is Barney?”
I thought of it last night while watching a BBC2 programme about aspiring young artists competing for the patronage of Charles Saatchi.
Basically the programme had selected 12 wannabe artists from a much larger group, this 12 to be further whittled down to 6 during the programme, who would then be given 10 weeks to produce some new artworks. The ultimate winner will have his/her piece exhibited with Saatchi’s collection and be given a studio for 3 years.
The whittling process from 12 to 6 was the subject of the programme, with each participant having to present one art work to the panel (which included Tracey Emin) and the final choice to be made by Saatchi himself.
As a little surprise the 12 contestants were asked to complete a life drawing of a nude model, which merely served to prove that none of them can actually draw. There were only 3 painters in the twelve, the rest were showing a variety of installations, mechanical devices and videos.
They then, individually, had to discuss their presentation with the panel and each was asked the simple question: “Why is this art?”. None managed a credible answer, indeed, most were genuinely flummoxed by the question.
This inability to justify didn’t seem to faze the panel – who showed a “famous” video by an “artist” called Bruce Nauman, walking bare-foot along the edge of a square marked on the floor. Nauman famously found himself suffering from “artist’s block” while sitting in his studio. Then he had a blinding revelation: “I’m an artist and, therefore, everything I create is, by definition, art”. And off he went. He’s beloved of the art community because this rationale has been the greatest “get out of jail free” gift that could ever have been given to that community.
I don’t know if this was the first of a series of programmes, but I hope there will be a follow-up. At least half the final 6 chosen appear to be utterly talentless charlatans, so my education has obviously sadly deficient and I welcome all opportunities to bridge the gaps.
One girl who made the final 6 presented a handle attached to the wall, with a referee’s whistle suspended from it. Asked to explain it she mumbled stuff about tactile feel, action of blowing the whistle etc.. Tracey Emin elaborated for her – it’s sexual blah blah. But what they particularly liked was her drawing of the nude model – an incomprehensible series of marks, squiggles etc across two large sheets of paper. The human form could not be discerned in all of this. But I know that I’m wrong, because this “drawing” also caught the approving eye of Charles Saatchi!.
FIFA & the Thieffy Henry affair
There’s not a single word of regret or condemnation in the FIFA press release* denying the FAI request for a replay, nor anything from Sepp Blatter or Michel Platini. This demonstrates the moral vacuum in the body responsible for running world football.
The fish rots from the head, so it’s hardly a surprise that the actual players are so willing to cheat as part and parcel of the game.
FIFA is clearly a rotten cod.
*20 Nov 2009 Press Release from the FIFA website
http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/newsid=1137489.html#fifa+statement+fai+request
“FIFA has today, 20 November 2009, replied to the request made by the Football
"Association of Ireland (FAI) to replay the 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa™ play-off match held on 18 November 2009 between France and the Republic of Ireland in Paris.
In the reply, FIFA states that the result of the match cannot be changed and the match cannot be replayed. As is clearly mentioned in the Laws of the Game, during matches, decisions are taken by the referee and these decisions are final.”
The fish rots from the head, so it’s hardly a surprise that the actual players are so willing to cheat as part and parcel of the game.
FIFA is clearly a rotten cod.
*20 Nov 2009 Press Release from the FIFA website
http://www.fifa.com/worldcup/news/newsid=1137489.html#fifa+statement+fai+request
“FIFA has today, 20 November 2009, replied to the request made by the Football
"Association of Ireland (FAI) to replay the 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa™ play-off match held on 18 November 2009 between France and the Republic of Ireland in Paris.
In the reply, FIFA states that the result of the match cannot be changed and the match cannot be replayed. As is clearly mentioned in the Laws of the Game, during matches, decisions are taken by the referee and these decisions are final.”
Penalty Points for Criminality/Anti-social behaviour
There was a lively debate on RTE’s Frontline last night on the subject of criminality and anti-social behaviour.
Clearly any solution will have to be multi-faceted, a combination of carrot & stick measures.
Most of those appearing in our courts are described as “unemployed” or “on disability” – in other words, the state is supplementing their criminal lifestyle. In addition, it seems to be widely accepted that ASBOs have limited deterrent effect on juvenile offenders, who often make life hell for neighbours.
Here’s one “stick” measure which might be effective.
We have a penalty points system for motoring offences – why not have one for criminal and anti-social activity offences? Every citizen (and welfare recipient) has an individual PPS number, so it should not be rocket science to modify the system.
Every conviction to carry a points tariff, leading to a reduction in benefit payment to the convicted party. If that party is a juvenile, the reduction will apply to the child benefits paid on behalf of that child. Such a system might incentivise parents to take more interest into what their kids are getting up to outside the house!
As with motoring points, these new points would automatically fall off the system 2 years after they were awarded, so that a period of good behaviour will also be rewarded.
At a time when many people are facing cuts in benefits and uncertainty about their financial security, clamping down on those who have no interest in working, but rather are intent on pursuing a state-funded lifestyle involving petty criminality and anti-social behaviour, would seem like the first and most appropriate reform of the welfare system.
Clearly any solution will have to be multi-faceted, a combination of carrot & stick measures.
Most of those appearing in our courts are described as “unemployed” or “on disability” – in other words, the state is supplementing their criminal lifestyle. In addition, it seems to be widely accepted that ASBOs have limited deterrent effect on juvenile offenders, who often make life hell for neighbours.
Here’s one “stick” measure which might be effective.
We have a penalty points system for motoring offences – why not have one for criminal and anti-social activity offences? Every citizen (and welfare recipient) has an individual PPS number, so it should not be rocket science to modify the system.
Every conviction to carry a points tariff, leading to a reduction in benefit payment to the convicted party. If that party is a juvenile, the reduction will apply to the child benefits paid on behalf of that child. Such a system might incentivise parents to take more interest into what their kids are getting up to outside the house!
As with motoring points, these new points would automatically fall off the system 2 years after they were awarded, so that a period of good behaviour will also be rewarded.
At a time when many people are facing cuts in benefits and uncertainty about their financial security, clamping down on those who have no interest in working, but rather are intent on pursuing a state-funded lifestyle involving petty criminality and anti-social behaviour, would seem like the first and most appropriate reform of the welfare system.
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Senator Shane Ross - fearless or toothless?
Saturday’s Irish Times Weekend section contains a review by Labour’s Joan Burton of Shane Ross’s “The Bankers: How the Banks brought Ireland to its knees”.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2009/1114/1224258790907.html
Ms. Burton tells us that Ross “has been a constant thorn in the side of corporate Ireland and has never flinched from exposing its practices to the public gaze”.
Shareholder in IN&M, Ross’s employers, might well be wishing that this was actually true as, in terms of the loss of value of their shares, they have now surpassed the beleaguered shareholders in AIB & BOI.
For many years the boardroom of IN&M was populated with various old faithful retainers and the offspring of our most notable press baron. Sir Anthony also filled the dual roles, for several years, of Chairman and Chief Executive - another clear breach of best practice in corporate governance principles.
While Senator Ross was routinely railing about comfortable cliques in other Irish boardrooms, he never once focused attention on his own employer.
The bold senator may like to present himself as a fearless newshound but, in matters relating to the business affairs of his paymaster, he has consistently shown himself to have all the bite of a toothless lapdog.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/weekend/2009/1114/1224258790907.html
Ms. Burton tells us that Ross “has been a constant thorn in the side of corporate Ireland and has never flinched from exposing its practices to the public gaze”.
Shareholder in IN&M, Ross’s employers, might well be wishing that this was actually true as, in terms of the loss of value of their shares, they have now surpassed the beleaguered shareholders in AIB & BOI.
For many years the boardroom of IN&M was populated with various old faithful retainers and the offspring of our most notable press baron. Sir Anthony also filled the dual roles, for several years, of Chairman and Chief Executive - another clear breach of best practice in corporate governance principles.
While Senator Ross was routinely railing about comfortable cliques in other Irish boardrooms, he never once focused attention on his own employer.
The bold senator may like to present himself as a fearless newshound but, in matters relating to the business affairs of his paymaster, he has consistently shown himself to have all the bite of a toothless lapdog.
Friday, November 06, 2009
NAMA & the budget deficit - we don't need that crap.
I’m not sure what, if anything, the broadcast today of Pat Kenny’s radio programme from O’Connell St added to the debate on the state of the nation. It might well be perceived that staging the programme in this way was, in itself, an act of solidarity with the trade union organised protest.
However, one contributor (Kieran Allen) was allowed to make the misleading claim, oft repeated by left-wing commentators, union reps and opposition politicians, that the €54bn (estimated) bill for NAMA is somehow tied into the yawning annual budget deficit.
This claim is generally allowed go unchallenged by programme presenters, as it was today by Pat Kenny.
However, on Kenny’s own Frontline tv programme some weeks back, Colm McCarthy made it forcibly clear that this claim is nonsense. The fact that it’s routinely made by economists and opposition politicians – who must know that it’s a lie – makes it all the more important that it is scotched immediately every time it is uttered.
To paraphrase a well-known media figure (Pat Kenny) – we don’t need that kind of crap.
However, one contributor (Kieran Allen) was allowed to make the misleading claim, oft repeated by left-wing commentators, union reps and opposition politicians, that the €54bn (estimated) bill for NAMA is somehow tied into the yawning annual budget deficit.
This claim is generally allowed go unchallenged by programme presenters, as it was today by Pat Kenny.
However, on Kenny’s own Frontline tv programme some weeks back, Colm McCarthy made it forcibly clear that this claim is nonsense. The fact that it’s routinely made by economists and opposition politicians – who must know that it’s a lie – makes it all the more important that it is scotched immediately every time it is uttered.
To paraphrase a well-known media figure (Pat Kenny) – we don’t need that kind of crap.
Monday, November 02, 2009
Some GPs opt out of Swine Flu Vaccination
It appears that some GPs are concerned that their professional indemnity insurance may not cover them in the event that they fail to identify all “at risk” patients on their practice list for the swine flu vaccine.
Their solution to this problem is to absent themselves entirely from the vaccination scheme, thus ensuring that all their “at risk” clients are actually put “at risk”.
Even if such blatant dereliction of duty does not invite legal actions from patients, which might well put “at risk” the GPs indemnity insurance, it surely must demand serious sanctions from their professional bodies.
No point in holding your breath!
Their solution to this problem is to absent themselves entirely from the vaccination scheme, thus ensuring that all their “at risk” clients are actually put “at risk”.
Even if such blatant dereliction of duty does not invite legal actions from patients, which might well put “at risk” the GPs indemnity insurance, it surely must demand serious sanctions from their professional bodies.
No point in holding your breath!
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Joan Burton - same accountancy degree as Bertie?
Labour’s Finance spokesman Joan Burton regularly reminds us that she is a qualified accountant.
I’m beginning to wonder if she graduated from the same college as Bertie Ahern.
For starters, Labour’s only detailed cost-cutting proposal for bridging the huge deficit in the public finances is to cap public sector pay @ €200k per annum.
Does even 1% of the public sector workforce earn over €200k? What miniscule contribution to cutting the deficit will such a token measure make?
Then there's NAMA.
Today in the Dail, Joan Burton is pushing all the populist buttons by implying that “nurses, firemen and doctors” are looking at pay cuts in order to fund NAMA.
Burton doesn’t seem to understand that the current budget deficit is not caused by NAMA and will not be changed by NAMA.
Any NAMA-related impact on the pay of public sector (and other workers) will only become a factor if NAMA fails to deliver in 7-10 years time.
So either Burton doesn’t understand the nature of the current budget deficit or else she’s playing populist politics by misleading the public.
In either case, that makes her very questionable ministerial material. Labour/Burton need to stop waffling, drop the NAMA populist bullshit and start putting forward some realistic solutions to resolve the budget deficit.
I’m beginning to wonder if she graduated from the same college as Bertie Ahern.
For starters, Labour’s only detailed cost-cutting proposal for bridging the huge deficit in the public finances is to cap public sector pay @ €200k per annum.
Does even 1% of the public sector workforce earn over €200k? What miniscule contribution to cutting the deficit will such a token measure make?
Then there's NAMA.
Today in the Dail, Joan Burton is pushing all the populist buttons by implying that “nurses, firemen and doctors” are looking at pay cuts in order to fund NAMA.
Burton doesn’t seem to understand that the current budget deficit is not caused by NAMA and will not be changed by NAMA.
Any NAMA-related impact on the pay of public sector (and other workers) will only become a factor if NAMA fails to deliver in 7-10 years time.
So either Burton doesn’t understand the nature of the current budget deficit or else she’s playing populist politics by misleading the public.
In either case, that makes her very questionable ministerial material. Labour/Burton need to stop waffling, drop the NAMA populist bullshit and start putting forward some realistic solutions to resolve the budget deficit.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Seanad turkeys squeal as Christmas approaches.
Enda Kenny's proposal to abolish the Seanad has certainly caused a reaction in, indisputably, the best club in town.
Yesterday featured the most animated and fractious "debate" in the Seanad - the turkeys can see Christmas coming. It was amusing to watch this bunch of self-serving wasters squealing at the prospect of their snouts being removed from the public purse trough. (There's the ham to go with the turkey/Xmas metaphor).
Even if Kenny's abolition proposal doesn't actually materialise, it must surely bring forward serious Seanad reform - and many of the current well-paid incumbents will be out on their ear. No great loss.
Yesterday featured the most animated and fractious "debate" in the Seanad - the turkeys can see Christmas coming. It was amusing to watch this bunch of self-serving wasters squealing at the prospect of their snouts being removed from the public purse trough. (There's the ham to go with the turkey/Xmas metaphor).
Even if Kenny's abolition proposal doesn't actually materialise, it must surely bring forward serious Seanad reform - and many of the current well-paid incumbents will be out on their ear. No great loss.
Monday, October 05, 2009
Mary Robinson for EU President?
Well, according to some Irish media (the Indo yesterday was prominent) Mary Robinson is on the short-list.
As she hasn’t a hope in hell, this cannot be a serious piece of news.
The EU is predominantly a trade-related political and economic conglomerate. Mary Robinson is a Mother Teresa-type figure who is into human rights rather than trade.
You can just imagine the relationship between China and the EU if Mary was the figurehead? They hated her guts when she was with the UN.
I looked up Paddy Power this morning but they don’t seem to be offering odds on her chances. However, I wouldn’t be backing her, I’d be looking to lay her. Now that’s an unfortunate turn of phrase.
As she hasn’t a hope in hell, this cannot be a serious piece of news.
The EU is predominantly a trade-related political and economic conglomerate. Mary Robinson is a Mother Teresa-type figure who is into human rights rather than trade.
You can just imagine the relationship between China and the EU if Mary was the figurehead? They hated her guts when she was with the UN.
I looked up Paddy Power this morning but they don’t seem to be offering odds on her chances. However, I wouldn’t be backing her, I’d be looking to lay her. Now that’s an unfortunate turn of phrase.
Lisbon Dialogue of the Deaf is over - now it's time to change the rules
Well the Lisbon Treaty is passed, at least as far as Ireland is concerned and, whether you voted Yes or No, you must be somewhat relieved that the media noise on this topic has subsided considerably.
The arguments for and against could not possibly be described as “debate”. If anything ever qualified as “the dialogue of the deaf”, this was surely it - both times around. I’ve had a headache from Lisbon II for the past three months, thank God it’s all over. Now we just have NAMA and the budgetary crisis to live through. Pass the anadin, please!
I heard a good quote this morning from Mark Twain on the subject of newspapers – “if you don’t read a newspaper you’re uninformed, and if you do read a newspaper you’re mis-informed.” That piece of wisdom could have been very aptly applied to the Lisbon Treaty “debate”.
On the subject of referendums (or referenda), we seem to be completely hamstrung by a couple of Supreme Court judgements. The Crotty Judgement means that every major change in the EU cannot be passed by our elected Oireachtas but must instead be put to a national referendum. Allied to this is the McKenna Judgement which prohibits the Government from spending public money to promote one particular side of the argument in such a referendum. Then you have the national broadcaster, RTE, which is deemed to be obliged to provide equal exposure to the Pro- and Anti- sides in any such referendum.
The result is that you can get massive over-exposure for all sorts of cranks, whingers and unelected demagogues and every referendum is a perfect opportunity for these to get some media exposure – despite most of them having no mandate whatsoever from the public to speak on their behalf.
In the Lisbon campaign we’ve had Declan Ganley/Libertas given huge exposure – despite the annihilation of that party at the polls in the recent European elections. Then you get cranks like Richard Greene (the wrinkly wing of Youth Defence) representing Coir, Roger Cole of the anti-war anti-US alliance, ex-Green Patricia McKenna who’d start a row in an empty room, Tax-free republican socialist Bobby Ballagh – who always wants more taxpayers money spent on the needy etc etc..
Every referendum must be like Christmas for all these fringe groups who can’t get elected to anything.
I can’t wait for the “children’s rights” referendum we’ve been long promised. This, apparently, will include a revision of the legal age for sex – essentially the minimum age at which young girls can have sex with older men – without the latter incurring a charge of statutory rape. I can’t wait for that to be debated on RTE. To achieve balance, they’ll need some dodgy old men to represent the “No” side – spelling out the joys of underage sex and the benefits it brings to young girls. You can see what a nonsense the McKenna Judgement and RTE “balance” rule can result in.
So we need some sort of weighted majority mechanism – just like that proposed in the Lisbon Treaty – to allow our own elected Government to promote appropriate constitutional change and also to allow RTE to represent the views of the majority in an appropriate way.
A proven electoral mandate would have to be at least one constituent of such a formula – note that I didn’t include MEP Joe Higgins or Sinn Fein’s Mary Lou in my earlier line-up of cranks.
The arguments for and against could not possibly be described as “debate”. If anything ever qualified as “the dialogue of the deaf”, this was surely it - both times around. I’ve had a headache from Lisbon II for the past three months, thank God it’s all over. Now we just have NAMA and the budgetary crisis to live through. Pass the anadin, please!
I heard a good quote this morning from Mark Twain on the subject of newspapers – “if you don’t read a newspaper you’re uninformed, and if you do read a newspaper you’re mis-informed.” That piece of wisdom could have been very aptly applied to the Lisbon Treaty “debate”.
On the subject of referendums (or referenda), we seem to be completely hamstrung by a couple of Supreme Court judgements. The Crotty Judgement means that every major change in the EU cannot be passed by our elected Oireachtas but must instead be put to a national referendum. Allied to this is the McKenna Judgement which prohibits the Government from spending public money to promote one particular side of the argument in such a referendum. Then you have the national broadcaster, RTE, which is deemed to be obliged to provide equal exposure to the Pro- and Anti- sides in any such referendum.
The result is that you can get massive over-exposure for all sorts of cranks, whingers and unelected demagogues and every referendum is a perfect opportunity for these to get some media exposure – despite most of them having no mandate whatsoever from the public to speak on their behalf.
In the Lisbon campaign we’ve had Declan Ganley/Libertas given huge exposure – despite the annihilation of that party at the polls in the recent European elections. Then you get cranks like Richard Greene (the wrinkly wing of Youth Defence) representing Coir, Roger Cole of the anti-war anti-US alliance, ex-Green Patricia McKenna who’d start a row in an empty room, Tax-free republican socialist Bobby Ballagh – who always wants more taxpayers money spent on the needy etc etc..
Every referendum must be like Christmas for all these fringe groups who can’t get elected to anything.
I can’t wait for the “children’s rights” referendum we’ve been long promised. This, apparently, will include a revision of the legal age for sex – essentially the minimum age at which young girls can have sex with older men – without the latter incurring a charge of statutory rape. I can’t wait for that to be debated on RTE. To achieve balance, they’ll need some dodgy old men to represent the “No” side – spelling out the joys of underage sex and the benefits it brings to young girls. You can see what a nonsense the McKenna Judgement and RTE “balance” rule can result in.
So we need some sort of weighted majority mechanism – just like that proposed in the Lisbon Treaty – to allow our own elected Government to promote appropriate constitutional change and also to allow RTE to represent the views of the majority in an appropriate way.
A proven electoral mandate would have to be at least one constituent of such a formula – note that I didn’t include MEP Joe Higgins or Sinn Fein’s Mary Lou in my earlier line-up of cranks.
Corruption: The rotting of the body politic.
Most of us think of corruption as the taking of bribes, improper use of power etc etc., but the word can also mean the rotting process of a dead body.
When senior politicians are investigated for accepting money from “friends”, or spending lavishly at public expense, we are invariably told that either “no favours were done” or “it was within Dept of Finance guidelines”, so there is no case to answer as far as the politicians are concerned.
However, to the general public these are prime examples of corruption, as in “the rotting of the body politic”.
The level of John O’Donoghue’s expenses is a disgrace, but he’s probably the tip of an ice-berg of similar excess among the ministers who have held office over the past decade.
Incidentally, Nora Owen might well be forgiven the occasional hint of a smile.
When senior politicians are investigated for accepting money from “friends”, or spending lavishly at public expense, we are invariably told that either “no favours were done” or “it was within Dept of Finance guidelines”, so there is no case to answer as far as the politicians are concerned.
However, to the general public these are prime examples of corruption, as in “the rotting of the body politic”.
The level of John O’Donoghue’s expenses is a disgrace, but he’s probably the tip of an ice-berg of similar excess among the ministers who have held office over the past decade.
Incidentally, Nora Owen might well be forgiven the occasional hint of a smile.
Friday, September 11, 2009
FG plan endorsed by Stiglitz - I don't think so.
I know I'm like a broken record, but...
On tonight’s RTE 6-1 news, FG’s Richard Bruton was interviewed by Bryan Dobson.
Dobson pointed out the FG’s alternative to NAMA has not been endorsed by any major independent economist.
Bruton responded by claiming that the approach had been endorsed Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize winning economist. Bruton also cited the UK experience with Northern Rock as tangible evidence that the FG approach can work.
Strangely, the FG website contains no reference I can find to such an endorsement. A strange omission indeed.
Now consider this: Northern Rock was a middle-ranking, deposit-taking, residential mortgage lender in the UK. It’s involvement with the SME sector, or the national money transmission service, is negligible, if not virtually non-existent.
The UK Govt action was taken as a direct result of a run on Northern Rock, we all saw the tv pictures of early morning queues of panicky depositors looking for their money back, even after the UK Govt increased the guarantee for depositors.
What’s the relevance to Ireland of the Northern Rock experience in the UK, a market serviced by several much larger banks e.g. Lloyds-TSB, Barclays, RSB-NatWest, HSBC, HBOS etc – all of whom were continuing to operate?
However, in the Irish context, the FG proposal is effectively to pronounce a death sentence the two largest players in the Irish Market – AIB & BoI – who dominate the SME market and the money-transmission service. This bears no comparison whatsoever with the potential market impact of the UK Govt’s take-over Northern Rock.
Let’s be clear – FG proposes to asset-strip those two banks when the Govt guarantee expires in Sept 2010 – they’ve made that very clear. They propose to take the good assets and leave the stripped carcass behind for the shareholders and bondholders.
In the interim, they propose to set up their National Recovery bank – and propose to distribute loans through the very banks they intend to asset-strip. How likely do they think it is that those banks, and their shareholders, will collude in this?
AIB & BOI will be forced to aggressively shrink their loan books, and the associated capital requirements, in the hope of surviving that Sept 2010 deadline, even if it’s as Zombie banks. They’ll be helped in that by the National Recovery Bank (NRB) – because, assuming they actually agree to act as intermediaries, the majority of the new loans they pass on the NRB will be their own existing dodgy loans, repackaged as “new” loans to the SME sector.
Those systemically important banks will also embark on a number of key survival programmes:
1. Non-core asset disposal programme – GB, NI, US and Polish assets will be sold.
2. Savage cost-cutting programme e.g. involuntary redundancy for 10-20% of staff in ROI, closure of marginal branches & non-core business units, outsourcing/ downgrading of services e.g. call centres etc..
3. Ramping up of interest rates to remaining customers, particularly in the mortgage market. This will be facilitated by the absence of competition from the foreign-owned banks, who are all trying to reduce their exposure to the Irish market.
I haven’t seen any of the above business risks credibly addressed by FG.
On tonight’s RTE 6-1 news, FG’s Richard Bruton was interviewed by Bryan Dobson.
Dobson pointed out the FG’s alternative to NAMA has not been endorsed by any major independent economist.
Bruton responded by claiming that the approach had been endorsed Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize winning economist. Bruton also cited the UK experience with Northern Rock as tangible evidence that the FG approach can work.
Strangely, the FG website contains no reference I can find to such an endorsement. A strange omission indeed.
Now consider this: Northern Rock was a middle-ranking, deposit-taking, residential mortgage lender in the UK. It’s involvement with the SME sector, or the national money transmission service, is negligible, if not virtually non-existent.
The UK Govt action was taken as a direct result of a run on Northern Rock, we all saw the tv pictures of early morning queues of panicky depositors looking for their money back, even after the UK Govt increased the guarantee for depositors.
What’s the relevance to Ireland of the Northern Rock experience in the UK, a market serviced by several much larger banks e.g. Lloyds-TSB, Barclays, RSB-NatWest, HSBC, HBOS etc – all of whom were continuing to operate?
However, in the Irish context, the FG proposal is effectively to pronounce a death sentence the two largest players in the Irish Market – AIB & BoI – who dominate the SME market and the money-transmission service. This bears no comparison whatsoever with the potential market impact of the UK Govt’s take-over Northern Rock.
Let’s be clear – FG proposes to asset-strip those two banks when the Govt guarantee expires in Sept 2010 – they’ve made that very clear. They propose to take the good assets and leave the stripped carcass behind for the shareholders and bondholders.
In the interim, they propose to set up their National Recovery bank – and propose to distribute loans through the very banks they intend to asset-strip. How likely do they think it is that those banks, and their shareholders, will collude in this?
AIB & BOI will be forced to aggressively shrink their loan books, and the associated capital requirements, in the hope of surviving that Sept 2010 deadline, even if it’s as Zombie banks. They’ll be helped in that by the National Recovery Bank (NRB) – because, assuming they actually agree to act as intermediaries, the majority of the new loans they pass on the NRB will be their own existing dodgy loans, repackaged as “new” loans to the SME sector.
Those systemically important banks will also embark on a number of key survival programmes:
1. Non-core asset disposal programme – GB, NI, US and Polish assets will be sold.
2. Savage cost-cutting programme e.g. involuntary redundancy for 10-20% of staff in ROI, closure of marginal branches & non-core business units, outsourcing/ downgrading of services e.g. call centres etc..
3. Ramping up of interest rates to remaining customers, particularly in the mortgage market. This will be facilitated by the absence of competition from the foreign-owned banks, who are all trying to reduce their exposure to the Irish market.
I haven’t seen any of the above business risks credibly addressed by FG.
Monday, August 31, 2009
Why FG's "solution" won't work.
Extract from Richard Bruton’s Irish Times opinion piece in last Friday’s Irish Times. It concerns their approach to the banking system in the NAMA-less solution they are proposing.
“In the event that the banks cannot pass such a stress test by the end of the guarantee period, Fine Gael’s proposal is to split each failed bank into two, leaving the assets with the most uncertain values (the developer loans) in legacy asset management companies owned largely by the shareholders and other classes of risk investors. Deposits, other short-term liabilities, personal loans, mortgages and business overdrafts, the branch networks and the vast majority of the staff would all move safely and seamlessly into a new, going concern “clean bank”, initially owned and guaranteed by the taxpayer.”
This extract illustrates one of the main challenges for FG – a complete absence of understanding as to how the situation is likely to evolve, and a naïve belief that if you write something down it makes it happen.
It was good to hear Richard Bruton finally admit, at yesterday’s committee meeting, that he hadn’t understood the difference between Senior and Subordinated bonds. (Joan Burton also demonstrated a need to read up on Derivatives).
A key plank in the FG solution is the setting up of a “National Recovery Bank”
Let’s assume that this “bank” can raise the necessary €20bn, as outlined in the FG proposal.
How long will it take to get it up and running?
How long to organise
- Fundraising
- Personnel
- Distribution Channels
- Accounting/Bookkeeping/IT/Loan processing Systems/Processes
At best it will take several months to get off the ground, and probably a couple of years before it could be fully operational.
In the interim, for the 2nd leg of FGs banking proposal, the two main banks servicing the Irish economy, AIB & BOI, are told that post-Sept 2010 there will be no extension of guarantees for their fund-raising activities.
What will they do?
- immediately withdraw from any new lending exposures
- commence a major pro-active de-leveraging of their balance sheets, cancelling/ calling in overdrafts
- engage in huge cost-cutting activities e.g. laying off staff, closing any marginal branches
Their sole focus will be in survival, at any cost, beyond Sept 2010 as Zombie banks, in the hope that they can, over time, work out their property loans and return to profitability.
In the process, they will also reduce the economy to a Zombie state – FGs National Recovery Bank won’t be up and running in time to make up the slack, and all the foreign-owned banks are firmly in retrenchment mode.
This aspect of the FG plan, supposedly focused on National Recovery, is mind-boggling in its naïve stupidity.
I have no difficulty with the proposal to leave the bad assets with the banks and letting the shareholders/bondholders take their chances with “long-term economic value” of the underlying security they hold.
But there’s also a need for a functioning banking system over the next 2-3 years while we, hopefully, work our way out of the current recession.
However, that involves allowing the Banks the prospect of trading through the period, so here’s the alternative proposal:
- The current blanket guarantee of all bank liabilities is allowed to expire next year and is not extended. This removes the comfort from the subordinated bondholders.
- The Govt extends the guarantee for ordinary depositors and senior debt providers.
- The Govt provides ongoing guarantees, but only for specific fund-raisings by the main banks on a case by case basis.
This approach gives the Govt considerable leverage in ensuring that the banks support the economy while, at the same time, trying to repair their balance sheets.
If additional capital is required by AIB and/or BOI post-Sept 2010, then the Govt can underwrite rights issues and, in the event that private investment is not forthcoming, will become a major, perhaps majority, shareholder in those banks.
The critical consideration is to maintain a functioning banking system through the cycle, not Zombify it a.s.a.p. as would inevitably happen with the current FG proposal.
“In the event that the banks cannot pass such a stress test by the end of the guarantee period, Fine Gael’s proposal is to split each failed bank into two, leaving the assets with the most uncertain values (the developer loans) in legacy asset management companies owned largely by the shareholders and other classes of risk investors. Deposits, other short-term liabilities, personal loans, mortgages and business overdrafts, the branch networks and the vast majority of the staff would all move safely and seamlessly into a new, going concern “clean bank”, initially owned and guaranteed by the taxpayer.”
This extract illustrates one of the main challenges for FG – a complete absence of understanding as to how the situation is likely to evolve, and a naïve belief that if you write something down it makes it happen.
It was good to hear Richard Bruton finally admit, at yesterday’s committee meeting, that he hadn’t understood the difference between Senior and Subordinated bonds. (Joan Burton also demonstrated a need to read up on Derivatives).
A key plank in the FG solution is the setting up of a “National Recovery Bank”
Let’s assume that this “bank” can raise the necessary €20bn, as outlined in the FG proposal.
How long will it take to get it up and running?
How long to organise
- Fundraising
- Personnel
- Distribution Channels
- Accounting/Bookkeeping/IT/Loan processing Systems/Processes
At best it will take several months to get off the ground, and probably a couple of years before it could be fully operational.
In the interim, for the 2nd leg of FGs banking proposal, the two main banks servicing the Irish economy, AIB & BOI, are told that post-Sept 2010 there will be no extension of guarantees for their fund-raising activities.
What will they do?
- immediately withdraw from any new lending exposures
- commence a major pro-active de-leveraging of their balance sheets, cancelling/ calling in overdrafts
- engage in huge cost-cutting activities e.g. laying off staff, closing any marginal branches
Their sole focus will be in survival, at any cost, beyond Sept 2010 as Zombie banks, in the hope that they can, over time, work out their property loans and return to profitability.
In the process, they will also reduce the economy to a Zombie state – FGs National Recovery Bank won’t be up and running in time to make up the slack, and all the foreign-owned banks are firmly in retrenchment mode.
This aspect of the FG plan, supposedly focused on National Recovery, is mind-boggling in its naïve stupidity.
I have no difficulty with the proposal to leave the bad assets with the banks and letting the shareholders/bondholders take their chances with “long-term economic value” of the underlying security they hold.
But there’s also a need for a functioning banking system over the next 2-3 years while we, hopefully, work our way out of the current recession.
However, that involves allowing the Banks the prospect of trading through the period, so here’s the alternative proposal:
- The current blanket guarantee of all bank liabilities is allowed to expire next year and is not extended. This removes the comfort from the subordinated bondholders.
- The Govt extends the guarantee for ordinary depositors and senior debt providers.
- The Govt provides ongoing guarantees, but only for specific fund-raisings by the main banks on a case by case basis.
This approach gives the Govt considerable leverage in ensuring that the banks support the economy while, at the same time, trying to repair their balance sheets.
If additional capital is required by AIB and/or BOI post-Sept 2010, then the Govt can underwrite rights issues and, in the event that private investment is not forthcoming, will become a major, perhaps majority, shareholder in those banks.
The critical consideration is to maintain a functioning banking system through the cycle, not Zombify it a.s.a.p. as would inevitably happen with the current FG proposal.
The silence of the 46 lambs - not a baaa!
The silence of the 46 lambs is deafening – not a baaa from any of them.
Following Garret Fitzgerald’s critical comments on yesterday’s Morning Ireland regarding the quality of their analysis, in particular their exaggeration of the projected budget deficit, Pat Kenny opened his programme at 10.00am with a reprise of Garret’s comments.
Kenny revealed that the programme had contacted Prof. Brian Lucey about Garret’s criticisms. Lucey claimed that “the numbers weren’t important” (is that a first from an economist?) and declined to come on air to discuss the issue. (Now that definitely is a first for this ubiquitous media whore.)
Kenny then said that the programme had also attempted, without success, to contact several of the other signatories. He then issued an open invitation for any one of the 46 signatories to contact the programme.
Kenny closed the programme at 12.00 without any contact from the gang of 46. Will we hear anything from them today, I wonder?
Following Alan Ahearne’s dissection of their sloppy miscalculation of the value of the underlying security, Garret’s attack may well have terminated the credibility of this bunch of wasters.
Good to see that there’s life in the old dog still.
Following Garret Fitzgerald’s critical comments on yesterday’s Morning Ireland regarding the quality of their analysis, in particular their exaggeration of the projected budget deficit, Pat Kenny opened his programme at 10.00am with a reprise of Garret’s comments.
Kenny revealed that the programme had contacted Prof. Brian Lucey about Garret’s criticisms. Lucey claimed that “the numbers weren’t important” (is that a first from an economist?) and declined to come on air to discuss the issue. (Now that definitely is a first for this ubiquitous media whore.)
Kenny then said that the programme had also attempted, without success, to contact several of the other signatories. He then issued an open invitation for any one of the 46 signatories to contact the programme.
Kenny closed the programme at 12.00 without any contact from the gang of 46. Will we hear anything from them today, I wonder?
Following Alan Ahearne’s dissection of their sloppy miscalculation of the value of the underlying security, Garret’s attack may well have terminated the credibility of this bunch of wasters.
Good to see that there’s life in the old dog still.
Friday, August 28, 2009
FG/Bruton anti-NAMA proposal is, sadly, rubbish.
There are legitimate arguments to be made on both sides of the NAMA/ Nationalisation debate, even if I detest the Lucey & Co/populist media commentator loose approach to the potential numbers involved.
But, as a life-long ABFFer I regret to say, the Bruton/FG approach, as espoused in today’s IT, is a clear recipe for disaster, as it displays a complete ignorance of how the real world economic/banking system works.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0828/1224253408843.html
Firstly: we’re now faced with a banking system where foreign-owned banks e.g Ulster, BoS(I)/Halifax, NIB, ACC etc..are effectively in retrenchment mode, they’re actively seeking to reduce their exposure to the Irish market.
When it comes to domestic players, Anglo Irish & Irish Nationwide are dead in the water, while permanent/TSB & EBS are actively trying to deleverage and reduce their loan books – just look at the uncompetitive interest rates they are quoting.
The only real players in the marketplace are AIB & BOI – and god knows they’re fussy enough about extending new credit.
But, between them AIB & BOI are by far the biggest players in all our key banking markets – deposits, lending (both to SMEs and consumers, mortgages,) money transmission (current accounts, payments) etc etc..
So what is essence of the Bruton/FG proposal, insofar as it affects the real economy?
1. Put the two main banks that drive economic activity in this country (even more so now all the foreign-owned banks want to pull out) on a death-watch for September 2010.
2. Create a new “National Recovery Bank” with no branches/outlets of any kind.
What does Bruton/FG think that (1) above will achieve, other than cause AIB/BOI to pull lines of credit from any even slightly dodgy small business across the country, in order to bolster their balance sheets,never mind not extending credit to new business? Even if they wanted to lend they couldn’t – because the FG policy proposal would mean that depositors would immediately start to move their funds elsewhere – to banks which aren’t lending to Irish business/consumers.
How does he think that the National Recovery bank will operate for SMEs when it has no distribution outlets? Online/Phone perhaps? This is a serious question.
The only certainty is that it will pick up every bad business in the country as a grateful client.
There are legitimate questions/challenges for NAMA, mainly around how taxpayers interests can be protected. Nationalisation or majority state ownership of the two main banks may well be an outcome.
But letting the economy/banking system stew for 12 months more than necessary, as espoused by Bruton/FG, is simply a recipe for disaster.
But, as a life-long ABFFer I regret to say, the Bruton/FG approach, as espoused in today’s IT, is a clear recipe for disaster, as it displays a complete ignorance of how the real world economic/banking system works.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0828/1224253408843.html
Firstly: we’re now faced with a banking system where foreign-owned banks e.g Ulster, BoS(I)/Halifax, NIB, ACC etc..are effectively in retrenchment mode, they’re actively seeking to reduce their exposure to the Irish market.
When it comes to domestic players, Anglo Irish & Irish Nationwide are dead in the water, while permanent/TSB & EBS are actively trying to deleverage and reduce their loan books – just look at the uncompetitive interest rates they are quoting.
The only real players in the marketplace are AIB & BOI – and god knows they’re fussy enough about extending new credit.
But, between them AIB & BOI are by far the biggest players in all our key banking markets – deposits, lending (both to SMEs and consumers, mortgages,) money transmission (current accounts, payments) etc etc..
So what is essence of the Bruton/FG proposal, insofar as it affects the real economy?
1. Put the two main banks that drive economic activity in this country (even more so now all the foreign-owned banks want to pull out) on a death-watch for September 2010.
2. Create a new “National Recovery Bank” with no branches/outlets of any kind.
What does Bruton/FG think that (1) above will achieve, other than cause AIB/BOI to pull lines of credit from any even slightly dodgy small business across the country, in order to bolster their balance sheets,never mind not extending credit to new business? Even if they wanted to lend they couldn’t – because the FG policy proposal would mean that depositors would immediately start to move their funds elsewhere – to banks which aren’t lending to Irish business/consumers.
How does he think that the National Recovery bank will operate for SMEs when it has no distribution outlets? Online/Phone perhaps? This is a serious question.
The only certainty is that it will pick up every bad business in the country as a grateful client.
There are legitimate questions/challenges for NAMA, mainly around how taxpayers interests can be protected. Nationalisation or majority state ownership of the two main banks may well be an outcome.
But letting the economy/banking system stew for 12 months more than necessary, as espoused by Bruton/FG, is simply a recipe for disaster.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Are we wasting 3rd level resources on women?
The introduction of the Health Professional Admissions Test (HPat), to be used in conjunction with the points score from the Leaving Cert in determining admission to University Medicine courses, has resulted in an approx. 50:50 mix of male and female successful candidates. This contrasts with a typical 60:40 skew in favour of females under the old points-only system.
This outcome has been attacked by female commentators, in particular former FG Education Minster Gemma Hussey who argues that the points system is the fairest way of allocating the most sought after 3rd level places.
Even if that is true, is it actually the best way to allocate them?
It is a fact that, in general, girls perform better than boys in the points race, while men, in general, perform better than women in the rat race. This would suggest that the current allocation of valuable and expensive 3rd-level resources may not be delivering the optimum return on investment, i.e. longer-term economic benefit to the country.
From a strategic point of view, the country might well benefit from skewing the allocation of 3rd-level places in favour of boys, reversing the current position. I think 60:40 would be a reasonable and balanced outcome.
This outcome has been attacked by female commentators, in particular former FG Education Minster Gemma Hussey who argues that the points system is the fairest way of allocating the most sought after 3rd level places.
Even if that is true, is it actually the best way to allocate them?
It is a fact that, in general, girls perform better than boys in the points race, while men, in general, perform better than women in the rat race. This would suggest that the current allocation of valuable and expensive 3rd-level resources may not be delivering the optimum return on investment, i.e. longer-term economic benefit to the country.
From a strategic point of view, the country might well benefit from skewing the allocation of 3rd-level places in favour of boys, reversing the current position. I think 60:40 would be a reasonable and balanced outcome.
Bloody academics - they're at it again!
Those bloody academics are at it again. This time 46, mainly unknowns juniors, have put their names to another Lucey anti-NAMA diatribe in the Irish Times.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0826/1224253267074.html
On RTE’s Morning Ireland, Alan Ahearne neatly filleted Lucey & Co on the key issue – their willingness to pluck figures from the air without any hard information on the actual assets under consideration e.g.
- the level of equity originally provided by the promoter
- the current income generated by the development
- the ability of the promoter to service the borrowings from other income sources
- the location/value/potential of the individual assets
The number of gobshites willing to put their names to this media circus, run for the benefit of Messrs Lucey, Whelan and Gurdgiev, is frankly irrelevant.
The fact that the 46 are willing to put their names to this poorly researched, illogically argued valuation suggests that their opinions can and should be discarded.
I liked Ahearne’s line about this being a serious business and not just something for (idle) academics to mess about with.
Ahearne’s line from earlier this year that there are two types of economist – those who know they don’t know and those who don’t know they don’t know – is proving to be as true today as the day he said it, and the latter continue to outnumber the former.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2009/0826/1224253267074.html
On RTE’s Morning Ireland, Alan Ahearne neatly filleted Lucey & Co on the key issue – their willingness to pluck figures from the air without any hard information on the actual assets under consideration e.g.
- the level of equity originally provided by the promoter
- the current income generated by the development
- the ability of the promoter to service the borrowings from other income sources
- the location/value/potential of the individual assets
The number of gobshites willing to put their names to this media circus, run for the benefit of Messrs Lucey, Whelan and Gurdgiev, is frankly irrelevant.
The fact that the 46 are willing to put their names to this poorly researched, illogically argued valuation suggests that their opinions can and should be discarded.
I liked Ahearne’s line about this being a serious business and not just something for (idle) academics to mess about with.
Ahearne’s line from earlier this year that there are two types of economist – those who know they don’t know and those who don’t know they don’t know – is proving to be as true today as the day he said it, and the latter continue to outnumber the former.
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Inventing the future.
A couple of critical inventions which will greatly improve the quality of life:
The Blackspot
This personal device creates a Wifi & Mobile phone blackspot for a radius of up to 100 metres from the wearer. The power output can be varied by the user to increase or reduce the diameter of this blackspot. In trials it has been effective up to 1,000 metres, but the microwave radiation at that range is sufficient to sterilise the user. Consequently, a maximum range of 100 metres will probably be deemed mandatory.
With the rapid spread of Wifi and mobile phone coverage now extending to aircraft, this device will become essential for anyone seeking a little peace. Indeed, you should not be surprised if, at some point in the near future, hotels and resorts start to promote themselves as “blackspots”, where the harried masses can come for some uninterrupted rest & recuperation.
The Pixeliminator
This clever device will shield the wearer from the unwanted intrusion of digital photography – whether by still or video camera or mobile photo.
The device works on the principle of monochromatism – it emits a low frequency radio wave which renders all the pixels of the wearer, as the intended subject of a photograph or video image, as a homogenous blob of one single colour and shade – with no discernible features. It doesn’t render the subject invisible to the camera, it merely records their presence as a blob.
This clever device will restore some semblance of privacy to the citizen and is destined to enliven the conversation over wedding photos & videos in years to come. “And who’s the blob dancing with Auntie Pam?”
Funding these projects:
To provide the necessary capital to finance development of the above devices, which will undoubtedly be highly profitable in due course (think Dyson), we’re about to launch the ultimate “cash cow”: Wii Adult!
No details, just use your imagination.
The Blackspot
This personal device creates a Wifi & Mobile phone blackspot for a radius of up to 100 metres from the wearer. The power output can be varied by the user to increase or reduce the diameter of this blackspot. In trials it has been effective up to 1,000 metres, but the microwave radiation at that range is sufficient to sterilise the user. Consequently, a maximum range of 100 metres will probably be deemed mandatory.
With the rapid spread of Wifi and mobile phone coverage now extending to aircraft, this device will become essential for anyone seeking a little peace. Indeed, you should not be surprised if, at some point in the near future, hotels and resorts start to promote themselves as “blackspots”, where the harried masses can come for some uninterrupted rest & recuperation.
The Pixeliminator
This clever device will shield the wearer from the unwanted intrusion of digital photography – whether by still or video camera or mobile photo.
The device works on the principle of monochromatism – it emits a low frequency radio wave which renders all the pixels of the wearer, as the intended subject of a photograph or video image, as a homogenous blob of one single colour and shade – with no discernible features. It doesn’t render the subject invisible to the camera, it merely records their presence as a blob.
This clever device will restore some semblance of privacy to the citizen and is destined to enliven the conversation over wedding photos & videos in years to come. “And who’s the blob dancing with Auntie Pam?”
Funding these projects:
To provide the necessary capital to finance development of the above devices, which will undoubtedly be highly profitable in due course (think Dyson), we’re about to launch the ultimate “cash cow”: Wii Adult!
No details, just use your imagination.
Saturday, August 08, 2009
Hats off to Rupert Murdoch!
My hat is off to Rupert Murdoch, who has recently declared his intention to charge for online access to his many media publications. It’s about time that someone, somewhere, sometime, declared that giving stuff away for free that actually costs real money to produce makes no economic sense and, ultimately, has no economic future.
The current business model on the internet not only makes no financial sense, it also creates a culture of entitlement to getting everything for nothing. Otherwise respectable middle-class people are induced into law-breaking use of unlicensed electronic equipment to steal cable tv, internet access, phone connections etc etc.. Such people should, of course, be reported and prosecuted – so watch out Bat!
The next step is to promote the creation of Wifi/Mobile phone “black-spots”, as opposed to hot-spots. What a relief it would be to find places where you can’t contact, or be contacted by, anyone else. Finally, you might regain control of your own time and your life without uninvited interruption or distraction. What a blessing that would be! I can see such places becoming a mecca for the overly-stressed – the next “big thing”
A firther important challenge is to kill 24/7 news and talk-radio!
Bruce Springsteen famously recorded a song which proclaimed that there were “57 channels and there’s nothing on”. Sadly, it now feels like there’s about 1057 competing channels and there’s still nothing on. Competition certainly hasn’t brought quality!
Our media is filled with the same talking/writing heads, endlessly repeating the same old tired guff ad nauseam. They speculate endlessly on what might happen if X, Y or Z was to occur, even when the result e.g. a general election, will be known within days. If you change radio stations, you’ll hear the same contributors turning up on RTE, Today FM & Newstalk over the course of any day. If only we could have a law that confined current affairs of any kind to 5% of station output we’d all be better off – believe me! That would be a boon to public service broadcasting. Perhaps coupled with a legal constraint on politicians – how much time per week/number of opinions they can give to media?
Give my head peace. Please.
The current business model on the internet not only makes no financial sense, it also creates a culture of entitlement to getting everything for nothing. Otherwise respectable middle-class people are induced into law-breaking use of unlicensed electronic equipment to steal cable tv, internet access, phone connections etc etc.. Such people should, of course, be reported and prosecuted – so watch out Bat!
The next step is to promote the creation of Wifi/Mobile phone “black-spots”, as opposed to hot-spots. What a relief it would be to find places where you can’t contact, or be contacted by, anyone else. Finally, you might regain control of your own time and your life without uninvited interruption or distraction. What a blessing that would be! I can see such places becoming a mecca for the overly-stressed – the next “big thing”
A firther important challenge is to kill 24/7 news and talk-radio!
Bruce Springsteen famously recorded a song which proclaimed that there were “57 channels and there’s nothing on”. Sadly, it now feels like there’s about 1057 competing channels and there’s still nothing on. Competition certainly hasn’t brought quality!
Our media is filled with the same talking/writing heads, endlessly repeating the same old tired guff ad nauseam. They speculate endlessly on what might happen if X, Y or Z was to occur, even when the result e.g. a general election, will be known within days. If you change radio stations, you’ll hear the same contributors turning up on RTE, Today FM & Newstalk over the course of any day. If only we could have a law that confined current affairs of any kind to 5% of station output we’d all be better off – believe me! That would be a boon to public service broadcasting. Perhaps coupled with a legal constraint on politicians – how much time per week/number of opinions they can give to media?
Give my head peace. Please.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)