Jon the Hat

It is a globally significant military base. Why risk it? Why pay Mauritius Billions? The whole premise is nonsense. It has never been part of Mauritius, the Chagoisian people such as they still exist don't want to be owned by Mauritius.

I strongly dislike agreeing with Trump on anything, but he is right on Chagos. Insane deal. Fortunately, I cannot think of much else I agree with him on.

The US will be building its own silk road for rare earths and critical minerals.

He obviously doesn't want to play along with Brand Beckham PR anymore, and that is his choice as a grown man. Clearly his mum and wife don't get on, and that is not much fun.

As you say, loans against future income is fine as long as the future income keeps coming. They are obviously spending it on something, else no point paying the interest and fees to bring forward the cash.

Excellent article in the times today about why many on the far lef including the likes of Jeremy Corbyn support the Iranian regime until recently. Essentially saying Lenin argued that anti-western-colonialism war and revolution around the world would hasten the downfall of capitalism in the West, so examples like the 1979 revolution were to be supported, however horrible they might turn out to be. Essentially Lenin was wrong, and the left find themselves aligned with some complete murderous scum for decades.

You are right except your example ignores the PSR period. Some of your wages are saved in the final year, while you crystalise the remaining amortisation in this year. So in your example, while the total PSR cost is reduced by 9M, it increased by 3M in this year and reduces by 12M in the next year. Which is fine if you can afford the 3M loss this year. If you can't, you are still better off keeping the player until their final year. So in effect to get net zero in PSR terms you would need to sell for 4M not 1M. It is the antithesis of good business.

The Iranian people deserve freedom and respect in their own country like everyone else.

That is a problem. Big time.

While I can understand the irritation, Chelsea could have taken a manager from them without the shared ownership. They got paid. They are also loaning players they would never afford otherwise like Chilwell.

He has to be obsessed with the book value being met.

In short, because a lot of people think Israel = bad therefore Iran cannot = bad as they are anti-Israel and Israel bombed them and stuff. They are ****wits. By any measure you care to use, the Iranian Regime is awful, and one should support the uprising of the people even if that means you presently happen to agree with Trump, Netanyahu and select other arseholes.

Beach parking fun yesterday. I am in line of cars cruising around for a spot, and a bloke in an Audi has stopped off to the left, not indicating. As I roll past him, some people appear around the end of the line of parked cars, and so I slow to a stop, maybe two car lengths in front of said Audi. When they get to their car, I indicate and once they have gone a minute or so later I park. As I get out of the car, the bloke in the Audi starts shouting at me that he was waiting. No indicating, no beep when I was indicating. Nothing. Was I in the wrong? in my book its the luck of the drawer if you happen to be in the right place when someone leaves the space is yours. Random waiting around the carp park might work, it might not, but it doesn't give you firs rights on the whole line of cars. South African bloke obviously.

Back to what? I read a bit of the story, and while it's not great an apparently clever man had zero idea what his friend was up to, I don't see why the bloke should have to apologise to the Epstein victims. No suggestion he was involved with anything dodgy.

It is how the US has worked for generations if you are a person of colour.

To be fair, so have a lot of other clubs who look nowhere near winning it. The spending is usually a given, still takes more than that.

It doesn't occur to them to wonder why they are hated and maybe do something about that instead.

I bet that looked like shit.

No one deserves to be shot in the head, but I can tell you if US law enforcement are pointing guns at you FFS stop driving. You know they are looking for an excuse.

It is deemed acceptable in the US for an armed federal agent to shoot someone who is threatening them. This is partly why I would never live in the US to be honest.

They trying to stop the cheap oil going to China. It's not all about the oil, but all about the influence of China in their backyard.

I agree with everything in bold. That said, it has always been pretty easy to get yourself shot by US law enforcement, and if people are going to act aggressively around those armed people then they really need their heads read. Is ti right? Often not. Is it so bloody obviously dangerous that the driver in question must take some responsibility for her actions? Yes it is.

As has been said before, I think you can draw a clear line between the Vichai period and the Aiyawatt period. Vichai and Susan together were not perfect, but they learned from their mistakes, and I think made their own luck. Since the tragic loss of Vichai certainly judgment has been severely lacking, and they appear to learn nothing. There is zero evidence they have the capability to improve. Unless he miraculously stumbles across and fully trusts & empowers a CEO who can both keep him happy/feeling important while making all the decisions, we are not going to bounce back.

Its a significant improvement over reporting this is a crime committed by a woman, which has been happening for years, often accompanied by a similar photo.

The flipside being the tech which stops you veering into oncoming traffic or brakes when you get too close to the car in front will no doubt help, and as it is software based continue to improve.