Published on: 26 Aug 2016
Greece has had a bad time of it over the last couple of years in terms of their finances but a recent announcement by their Finance Ministry may result in animals coming to the rescue.
When I say animals, I should be more specific and say that dogs will be helping out and not just any dogs but dogs who can sniff out money.
Let me explain a bit.
It’s been well documented that Greece has had a few financial problems. There were fears that they would crash out of the euro. Capital controls followed and there was a new international bailout for the country.
As a result, a lot of the Greek population perhaps understandably didn’t feel that confident in trusting the banks to look after their cash and a significant amount of money is being held outside of banks.
From November 2014 to July 2015 over 50 billion euros was withdrawn from the banks and It’s been estimated that between 15 to 20 billion euros is still being held by Greeks outside of the banking system.
That’s a lot of mattresses to be storing cash under and people are looking at avoiding capital controls and instead take the money out of the country without the authorities knowing.
Taking a suitcase of cash out of the country is seen as a safe option for a lot of people.
So, where do the dogs come in?
Well, a recent posting on a government website said that a team would be put together to assess tenders for the provision of dogs whose job is to detect cash. The dogs would be in place to sniff out significant amounts of cash being taken out of the country at border points.
Given all the money problems in Greece, one big advantage of this plan is that the dogs won’t be paid in cash. Instead, they will be more than happy to be rewarded with a biscuit or two…
Published on: 25 Jul 2016
When you were young did you dream of being an accountant when you grew up? My guess is that most of you probably didn’t fall asleep at night dreaming of spreadsheets and calculators. Perhaps a more common childhood dream was playing for your favourite football team or being a famous actor or actress.
There have been some interesting developments recently though when it comes to playing for your favourite football team and some of the top teams are now signing players who will never be kicking a ball for their team. Instead, they will be representing their teams in the world of gaming, or to be more specific, football gaming such as EA Sports Fifa
Manchester City have recently signed Keiran Brown, an 18 year old gamer who has more than 12,000 followers on his YouTube channel.
Keiran will represent Machester City at Fifa esports tournaments where gamers sit in front of computers representing their team and watched by crowds of thousands of spectators.
Manchester City didn’t disclose how much Keiran will be paid but other professional gamers are reported to be paid in the region of £3,000 per month and can also win prize money at tournaments which can run into the thousands of pounds.
It’s quite a smart move for the club though as football games on consoles such as Xbox and PlayStation are extremely popular with supporters of the actual game.
Diegao Gigliani, vice-president of media and innovation at Manchester City was quoted as saying “As esport continues to gain momentum, it makes sense for our clubs to be part of the action and get closer to our fans, who love playing EA Sports Fifa as Manchester City. We will be a bigger presence at gaming tournaments, we will have more content through our digital channels and we will activate even more with our fans at matches and club events.”
So, in summary, if you want to play for your favourite football team but can’t kick a ball then maybe get out your Xbox and start practicing…
Published on: 26 Mar 2016
Creativity and innovation in any organisation should always be welcome and whilst technology is often at the forefront of innovation it is sometimes the really simple ideas that can create benefits.
Unfortunately, in this particular situation it didn’t quite go according to plan.
The initial idea was good. Officials in charge of the 1,200 acre Minto-Brown Island Park in Oregon in America were concerned that several invasive plants were taking over the park and killing off a number of the native flora including maple and hazelnut trees.
The solution put forward was to create a crack team of 75 goats who would eat the invasive plants such as the Armenian blackberry and the English Ivy which would then mean that the native flora would thrive.
75 goats were duly obtained from a company called Yoder Goat Rentals (as an interesting aside I wonder how many of you were aware that you could rent a team of goats. I certainly wasn’t.)
The goats got down to work but 6 weeks later the project was cancelled.
There were a number of issues.
Firstly, the goats were fairly relaxed about what they ate. In terms of the invasive Armenian blackberry for example they decided to eat the tasty blackberry leaves but left the prickly bramble. This resulted in the plant carrying on growing.
Secondly, they didn’t show any distinction between the (tasty) maple and hazelnut trees which they were supposed to be helping and the invasive plants.
Thirdly, the total cost of the 6-week pilot programme was $20,719 which was nearly 5 times the $4,245 cost for a normal parks maintenance man supported by a prison inmate work crew.
Finally, according to a report to the city council the goats “had a barnyard aroma”.
In summary, a nice try but it didn’t quite work. Still, as any successful business person will surely agree, you don’t progress unless you try. Better luck next time and at least the goats had a nice 6-week holiday in a lovely park…
Published on: 19 Mar 2016
What have nightclubs and lemons got in common? The answer may not be that obvious but the common link is the “inflation basket” of the 700 most used goods and services which the Office for National Statistics (ONS) uses to determine price movements for the inflation rate.
This inflation basket dates back nearly 70 years and the ONS currently uses around 180,000 separate price quotations for goods and services within the basket every month to come up with an inflation number for the whole UK economy.
Each year the items within the basket are updated to take account of changes in consumers spending patterns and a dozen or so items are added or dropped from the basket.
This year nightclubs have been removed from the basket as the younger generation are now preferring to do other things rather than go to nightclubs.
In the last 10 years the number of nightclubs in the UK has fallen from over 3,000 to less than 1,750.
In a great illustration of the impact that changes in the PESTEL environmental analysis model can have, there are several reasons for the decline in nightclubs including:
Economic – student grants have been replaced by student loans and as a result the students themselves now have less money to spend on expensive nightclub drinks.
Social – socialising with friends now more and more involves social media. Why meet up in a dark nightclub when you can Snapchat for example? Also, very dark nightclubs will limit the opportunities for photos for your Facebook feed…
Technology – whereas in the past people would often go to nightclubs to meet new people, websites such as the dating site Tinder now make it easier to meet new people without having to go to the trouble of trying to communicate with someone by shouting at the top of your voice in a nightclub which is so dark you can hardly see the person you’re shouting at…
Legal – the smoking ban imposed in recent years has impacted on the number of smokers who go to nightclubs (incidentally, electronic cigarette refills have been added to the basket this year following the increase in popularity of e-cigarettes)
What about lemons? Well Lemons have been added to the basket.
An increase in the popularity of home cooking driven by all of the cooking programmes currently on TV has led to a surge in demand for lemons.
So lemons are in and nightclubs are out.
Other changes include the removal of GPS satnavs for cars (more people are using their smartphones for directions) and the addition of mobile phone covers.
In case you’re interested here are the full details of the basket and how it is compiled.
Published on: 15 Feb 2016
Buying whisky or investing in whisky – that’s an interesting question and my guess is that most people who buy whisky are planning on gently pouring it into a glass and maybe adding some ice or a mixer before settling back to savour the flavour (before possibly waking up the next day with a headache…)
But should you be buying whisky as an investment rather than as a consumable item?
Most people are aware of the leading share indexes around the world such as the FTSE 100 and the S&P 500 (which show the index for the largest 100 and 500 companies quoted on the London and New York stock exchanges respectively) but there are also a number of other indexes out there.
These indexes measure movements and one of the more interesting ones is the Rare Whisky Apex 1000 which measures the price movement for rare scotch whisky.
It’s a significant market and last year there were rare whiskies sold at auction in the UK amounting to £9.6 million.
There was also a strong demand for rare whisky in Asia. In August last year a bottle of 1960 Japanese Karuizawa whisky was sold for over £80,000 which is a pretty significant figure for a bottle of whisky!
Back to the indexes though and the performance of the rare whisky index last year was impressive. It grew by 14%. Other indexes in comparison performed as follows in 2015:
FTSE 100 – down by 4.9%
S&P 500 – up by 0.7%
Gold index – fell by 10%.
So the increase in the Whisky index of 14% looks very good when compared to the major indexes but I guess there could be one problem.
Namely, if you’ve had a bit too much to drink and are looking for something to finish the evening off you’re more likely to drink some of your whisky investment than consume some of your share or gold investment.
Published on: 12 Oct 2015
Are you Facebook friends with a colleague at work? Have you ever been tempted to unfriend them?
Whilst unfriending someone on Facebook only involves a simple click, the Fair Work Commission (an employment tribunal) in Australia has found that unfriending a colleague on Facebook was workplace bullying.
Rachel Roberts worked at the Australian estate agent View and alleged that the firm’s owner and his wife had subjected her to workplace bullying on 18 separate occasions.
Rachel Roberts argued that amongst other things James and Lisa Bird deliberately left her work unprocessed for more than a week and refused to showcase her properties in the business’s front window.
Perhaps the most interesting allegation though was that after a meeting between Ms Roberts and Mrs Bird where Mrs Bird described Ms Roberts as “a naughty little schoolgirl running to the teacher,” Ms Roberts tried to leave the room but was initially prevented from leaving by Mrs Bird standing in front of the door.
She eventually managed to leave the room and was sat in her car in a “very distressed state” when it occurred to her that Mrs Bird may make a Facebook comment about the incident.
Miss Roberts went on to Facebook to check for any comments but found that she had… (wait for the drama to unfold)… been unfriended by Mrs Bird.
Yes, shock of all shocks but she had been unfriended on Facebook…
Now, whilst a lot of you may well be thinking that being unfriended on Facebook isn’t a major deal, the Fair Work Commission specifically cited the Facebook unfriending in its decision, saying that it evidenced “a lack of emotional maturity and is indicative of unreasonable behaviour.”
Now, before everyone starts worrying about which colleagues they are friends with on Facebook and whether or not they should unfriend them, it’s worth noting that the Facebook unfriending incident in this situation was one of 8 occasions when it was considered to be “unreasonable behaviour”. In other words, it’s unlikely that unfriending someone in isolation would be considered to be bullying.
Published on: 01 Sep 2015
Imagine the scene. You want to go to a music Festival but the tickets are expensive.
What do you do?
I know. Why don’t you pay for the tickets with blood rather than money?
Now whilst this statement may sound a bit weird, some creative minds behind the Untold music festival in Romania have come up with an excellent idea which is a classic win – win situation.
In fact, rather than a win – win situation it’s more of a win – win – win situation.
So who are the three winners in this situation?
The organisers of the festival identified the fact that Romania has one of the lowest percentages of people who donate blood (Romania ranks second to last in Europe regarding the number of blood donors with only 1.7% of the population donating blood) and came up with a novel way of helping to increase the amount of blood donations.
They offered free tickets and discounts to people who donated blood.
It was reported that up to 500 people donated blood so all in all a very successful project.
The Blood Transfusion Service was a winner as it received more blood and importantly raised awareness of the need for more blood.
The organisers of the festival were winners as this was a very slick piece of PR for a first-time festival and despite having top DJs such as Avicii and David Guetta headlining the event it was great to have national and global publicity as a result of this.
The third winner were the individuals who gave blood and obtained free tickets.
Mysteriously though, was there a fourth winner?
It hasn’t gone unnoticed that the festival took place in Transylvania which is the home of Bram Stoker’s legendary Dracula.
Dracula survives by drinking fresh human blood.
Was this in fact a ploy to build up the stocks of blood for the mysterious Count Dracula…
Published on: 26 Aug 2015
The major stock markets around the world have had a rough ride this last week. The drop in share prices has been driven by the heavy falls on the Chinese stock market. At the time of writing the Shanghai Composite index (a stock market index of all stocks that are traded at the Shanghai Stock Exchange) has fallen by nearly 16% over the last week.
If you read the financial press words such as “bear market”, “bull market” and “correction” are being used a lot.
What do these phrases mean and where do they come from?
A bear market is where share prices are falling and is commonly regarded as coming into existence when share indexes have fallen by 20% or more. A market correction is similar to a bear market but not as bad (a market correction is where there is a fall of 10% from a market’s peak).
A bull market on the other hand is where share prices are increasing.
So, where do the phrases bear market and bull market come from?
There are two main views on the origin of these terms.
The first view is based on the methods with which the two animals attack. A bear for example will swipe downwards on its target whilst a bull will thrust upwards with its horns. A bear market therefore is a downwards market with declining prices whilst a bull market is the opposite with rising prices.
The second view on the origin is based around the “short selling” of bearskins several hundred years ago by traders. Traders would sell bearskins before they actually owned them in the hope that the prices would fall by the time they bought them from the hunters and then transferred them to their customers. These traders became known as bears and the term stuck for a downwards market. Due to the once-popular blood sport of bull and bear fights, a bull was considered to be the opposite of a bear so the term bull market was born.
Whatever the actual origin of the terms though I’m sure most people will be hoping for a bull market rather than a bear market.
Published on: 20 Mar 2015
We’ve all made typos in the past but I bet your typo wasn’t as expensive as this one.
Typos, where you misspell a word or put in a wrong word by mistake, are fairly common. This particular typo though was incredibly costly as it resulted in a company going out of business, 250 people losing their jobs and the government having to pay £9 million in compensation.
Back in 2009 Mr Davison-Sebry, the MD and co-owner of Taylor and Sons Ltd was enjoying a holiday in the Maldives when he received a phone call asking why his company had gone into receivership.
Receivership is very often the first stage of a company going out of business. It typically occurs when a company is suffering financial difficulties and an independent “receiver” is called in to run the company instead of the directors.
Taylor & Sons Ltd was a successful company. It had been established back in 1875 and was doing very well so why the call to the MD asking why his company had gone into receivership?
Well it turns out that Companies House (the organisation in the UK that publishes official notices about companies) had issued a notice saying that Taylor & Sons Ltd had gone into receivership.
Unfortunately for all of the people involved with Taylor & Sons Ltd, it was a typo by Companies House and the company that had actually gone into receivership was Taylor & Son Ltd and not Taylor & Sons Ltd.
Companies House rectified their “one letter mistake” within a few days but it was too late. There was a snowball effect as one supplier after another heard about it and despite being told that Taylor & Sons Ltd was financially secure, they terminated the orders and cancelled the credit agreements.
Within 3 weeks all of the company’s 3,000 suppliers had cancelled agreements and would not supply the company anymore.
The end result was that Taylor & Sons Ltd lost all of their suppliers and as a result couldn’t produce anything for their customers so they ended up going out of business.
The end of a 140 year-old company and all due to a one letter type.
The directors were understandably unhappy about this and took Companies House to court where they were recently successful in their case and won nearly £9 million in damages.
That was probably the most expensive one letter typo in history.
Published on: 14 Nov 2014
Gin and tonic is a drink that has caused a number of hangovers over the years but for two individuals it is going to make them very wealthy.
Gin is often credited with being a traditional English drink but the first recorded date for the production of gin was actually in the Netherlands in the 17th Century.
One of the key ingredients of tonic water is quinine.
Quinine is said to have many medicinal purposes and was first discovered by local tribes in Peru and Bolivia. Some people claim that quinine has medicinal purposes which helps various ailments including malaria.
The bringing together of gin and tonic happened in the early 1800s when British army officers in India were using quinine in an anti-malarial capacity and decided to hide the bitter quinine taste by mixing it with tonic water and then hiding the taste even further by adding gin.
The drink “gin and tonic” then came into existence.
Fast forward to 2005 and the company Fever Tree which was set up by Charles Rolls and Tim Warrillow produced their first bottle of upmarket tonic water.
Fever Tree tonic water has been selling very well since then and the company is now being quoted on the AIM (AIM is the Alternative Investment Market which is a sub-market of the London Stock Exchange and allows smaller companies to float shares with a more flexible regulatory system than is applicable to the main market).
The Fever Tree company has been valued at £154 million. That’s not a bad valuation for a company that’s selling tonic water.
There will no doubt be happy faces at the company and the success of the flotation will be toasted by a glass or two of champagne. Or should that be a glass or two of gin and tonics?