Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[ICTChris]

I've seen several claims made that one reason for the fall was the campaign around date rape drugs.

Did you see any difference in terms of gender?

Or is it just being used as an excuse?

Where did you see those claims?

[101]

9 hours ago, strichener said:

Checking of papers has many connotations, not just by the Germans during the war. 

I notice that the irony of you calling out hyperbole whilst similarly posting hyperbole was completely lost on you.

I'm glad you agree it has connotations with a time in which millions of people were systematically killed and presuming you agree it is completely inappropriate and offensive to compare it with being asked to provide vaccine status.

The crimes against humanity were horrific, I'm sure you don't consider that hyperbolic.

The language used especially in the current climate is very important.

[Left Back]

16 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

 

Where did you see those claims?

 

On this thread.

[Elixir]

Oaft, Frankie putting yesterday's car crash displays from Wee Bully and Willie's Tache on full display for all to see.

As for utter junk modelling with such preposterous extremes - they should simply never see the light of day.

[Dawson Park Boy]

Great report by Nick Triggle on the BBC where he states that we are about to see a huge fall in the number of daily cases.

This guy is one of the few honest reporters on this subject.

[Left Back]

4 minutes ago, Dawson Park Boy said:

Great report by Nick Triggle on the BBC where he states that we are about to see a huge fall in the number of daily cases.

This guy is one of the few honest reporters on this subject.

He doesn't state that at all and it would be daft to seeing as the models have been so spectacularly wrong all through the pandemic.

He states it could happen.  He also acknowledges the model this claim is based on is the most optimistic out there and other models indicate the most likely scenario is cases will fall but not at the spectacular rate predicted by the LSHTM model.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59039739

[craigkillie]

8 hours ago, Left Back said:

Unless I’m missing something the timeframe goes to about 8th November on figure 11.

ETA the report itself says 7th November.

 

6 hours ago, Todd_is_God said:

Except, as has already been pointed out, the end date of that graph is 7th November - 12 days away.

The final date of the actual data is on or around the 15th October, and the exact same passage of text where the 7th November date comes from explicitly states that this is over a three-week period, not 12 days or two weeks (or, in fairness, a month as I originally said)

[Honest_Man#1]

1 hour ago, ICTChris said:

 

Where did you see those claims?

 

Wee Bully.

8 hours ago, Frankie S said:

As an alternative to the ill-informed twaddle being peddled by people with absolutely no involvement in the nightclub sector, I’ll provide some actual data from the front line.

Here are the stats from the nightclub I own:

Friday 22nd Oct - combined door and bar take down 30.45% on the equivalent Friday last month (Fri 24.09.21). Down 28.78% on the average Friday take this month (October).

Saturday 23rd Oct - combined door and bar take down 35.61% on the equivalent Saturday last month (Sat 25.09.21). Down 35.17% on the average Saturday take this month (October).

Btw, 35% down translates to over 150 people on a Saturday night for us alone, rather than the ‘1 or 2’ that has been speculated upthread. And bear in mind, the 35% drop isn’t wholly attributable to people actually knocked back at the door for not having proper certification, it’s also comprised of those who didn’t bother going out as they knew they wouldn’t get in (the vaccine passport scheme is hardly a well kept secret), and those who simply went somewhere they knew the enforcement would be laxer. 

So, broadly in line with the figures reported (albeit at the lower end) by the Music Venues Trust survey of nightclubs, live music venues (and other hospitality outlets affected by vaccine passport regulations), which estimates the average drop in trade across the industry as 39% (with 59% of membership reporting so far). A similar survey by the NTIA (Night-Time Industries Association), the one that has been widely reported in the media, found a 40% reduction in trade this weekend, remarkably consistent with MVT’s figures.

So, for an industry that has been decimated by closure for the majority of the last 19 months, and is now just trying to find its feet again, with the withdrawal of furlough and the termination of all other forms of government support, in the context of catastrophic staffing and supply issues (greatly exacerbated by Brexit), losing almost 40% of their trade overnight due to the Scottish government’s introduction of the Covid Passport scheme is, as you can imagine, the very last thing the sector needs right now. Unlike football clubs, who seem to have secured governmental approval of spot checks for vaccine passports, nightclubs are expected to check ALL customers for proof of double vaccination, a hugely onerous burden.

As ever, it is Scottish businesses that are picking up the economic cost of the Scottish Government’s draconian restrictions, and not the Scottish government. It is Scottish businesses that are picking up the tab for the Scottish government’s avowed policy of incentivising the younger generation to get vaccinated, even as the evidence suggests that cases are actually falling among the club-age demographic (despite nightclubs, live music venues etc. operating without Covid passports for 2 and half months now) and recent U.K. spikes are mainly attributable to school age children and their immediate families. There is, as it stands, no financial assistance whatsoever for those sectors adversely impacted by the Covid passport scheme, and as ever, those outlets that are most diligent in enforcing the policy will suffer the most, with custom inevitably gravitating towards outlets that enforce the regulations less diligently. This is the paradox of the scheme - the Scottish government want the sector to buy into, and strictly enforce, a regulatory regime that will dramatically reduce their footfall and completely eliminate their profit margins, without any financial support whatsoever. The only incentive to enforce the scheme is the fear of legal sanctions, with Sturgeon’s oft-stated threat of the closure of the entire sector hovering above our heads like the sword of Damocles.

The Scottish government hasn’t even bothered to hide its absolute contempt for the nighttime economy throughout the last nineteen months, and it has emphatically failed to engage with the sector at every turn. We can safely assume that, irrespective of the cost to businesses and jobs, Scot Gov will continue to punish, penalise, scapegoat and arbitrarily regulate the sector to within an inch of its life, as that has been its modus operandi throughout the pandemic.

Great post, unfortunately wasted on the poster it was in response to, as he’ll ignore it with fingers in ears as it reads horrendously for the SG.

[Dawson Park Boy]

20 minutes ago, Left Back said:

He doesn't state that at all and it would be daft to seeing as the models have been so spectacularly wrong all through the pandemic.

He states it could happen.  He also acknowledges the model this claim is based on is the most optimistic out there and other models indicate the most likely scenario is cases will fall but not at the spectacular rate predicted by the LSHTM model.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-59039739

You’re right and I apologise having now read it in full.

However, he is one of the few reporters who tries to give a balanced view on the subject rather than the constant doom and gloom merchants.

[Honest_Man#1]

On the radio this morning discussing with someone the potential rises due to COP26. Both presenter and guest both seemed to strongly agree that delegates do not need vaccine passports as “we can’t have exclusionary policies” for such an event.

Absolutely fine to have exclusionary policies for the scum general public in scenarios where they want to enjoy themselves, but absolutely NOT fine for political delegates.

[strichener]

1 hour ago, 101 said:

I'm glad you agree it has connotations with a time in which millions of people were systematically killed and presuming you agree it is completely inappropriate and offensive to compare it with being asked to provide vaccine status.

The crimes against humanity were horrific, I'm sure you don't consider that hyperbolic.

The language used especially in the current climate is very important.

Go back and read what you have just posted, take 10 Minutes and then read it again.  If you still think that "asking for papers" is anti-Semitic then here is a link for people of like mindedness.  Batshit mentalist who see everything as anti-Semitic

Edited October 26, 2021 by strichener

[Left Back]

28 minutes ago, craigkillie said:

 

The final date of the actual data is on or around the 15th October, and the exact same passage of text where the 7th November date comes from explicitly states that this is over a three-week period, not 12 days or two weeks (or, in fairness, a month as I originally said)

I think we all agree that it's garbage and should never have been published and this might seem like splitting hairs over a few days but the explanatory text states it's "based on positive test data reported up to 20th October" so even that doesn't add up as it's then less than 3 weeks to November 7th.

All in all a complete fail of a publication that does nothing for it's own credibility.

[ICTChris]

2 hours ago, Left Back said:

On this thread.

 

53 minutes ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

Wee Bully.

Bloody hell. 

[Bairnardo]

9 hours ago, Frankie S said:

As an alternative to the ill-informed twaddle being peddled by people with absolutely no involvement in the nightclub sector, I’ll provide some actual data from the front line.

Here are the stats from the nightclub I own:

Friday 22nd Oct - combined door and bar take down 30.45% on the equivalent Friday last month (Fri 24.09.21). Down 28.78% on the average Friday take this month (October).

Saturday 23rd Oct - combined door and bar take down 35.61% on the equivalent Saturday last month (Sat 25.09.21). Down 35.17% on the average Saturday take this month (October).

Btw, 35% down translates to over 150 people on a Saturday night for us alone, rather than the ‘1 or 2’ that has been speculated upthread. And bear in mind, the 35% drop isn’t wholly attributable to people actually knocked back at the door for not having proper certification, it’s also comprised of those who didn’t bother going out as they knew they wouldn’t get in (the vaccine passport scheme is hardly a well kept secret), and those who simply went somewhere they knew the enforcement would be laxer. 

So, broadly in line with the figures reported (albeit at the lower end) by the Music Venues Trust survey of nightclubs, live music venues (and other hospitality outlets affected by vaccine passport regulations), which estimates the average drop in trade across the industry as 39% (with 59% of membership reporting so far). A similar survey by the NTIA (Night-Time Industries Association), the one that has been widely reported in the media, found a 40% reduction in trade this weekend, remarkably consistent with MVT’s figures.

So, for an industry that has been decimated by closure for the majority of the last 19 months, and is now just trying to find its feet again, with the withdrawal of furlough and the termination of all other forms of government support, in the context of catastrophic staffing and supply issues (greatly exacerbated by Brexit), losing almost 40% of their trade overnight due to the Scottish government’s introduction of the Covid Passport scheme is, as you can imagine, the very last thing the sector needs right now. Unlike football clubs, who seem to have secured governmental approval of spot checks for vaccine passports, nightclubs are expected to check ALL customers for proof of double vaccination, a hugely onerous burden.

As ever, it is Scottish businesses that are picking up the economic cost of the Scottish Government’s draconian restrictions, and not the Scottish government. It is Scottish businesses that are picking up the tab for the Scottish government’s avowed policy of incentivising the younger generation to get vaccinated, even as the evidence suggests that cases are actually falling among the club-age demographic (despite nightclubs, live music venues etc. operating without Covid passports for 2 and half months now) and recent U.K. spikes are mainly attributable to school age children and their immediate families. There is, as it stands, no financial assistance whatsoever for those sectors adversely impacted by the Covid passport scheme, and as ever, those outlets that are most diligent in enforcing the policy will suffer the most, with custom inevitably gravitating towards outlets that enforce the regulations less diligently. This is the paradox of the scheme - the Scottish government want the sector to buy into, and strictly enforce, a regulatory regime that will dramatically reduce their footfall and completely eliminate their profit margins, without any financial support whatsoever. The only incentive to enforce the scheme is the fear of legal sanctions, with Sturgeon’s oft-stated threat of the closure of the entire sector hovering above our heads like the sword of Damocles.

The Scottish government hasn’t even bothered to hide its absolute contempt for the nighttime economy throughout the last nineteen months, and it has emphatically failed to engage with the sector at every turn. We can safely assume that, irrespective of the cost to businesses and jobs, Scot Gov will continue to punish, penalise, scapegoat and arbitrarily regulate the sector to within an inch of its life, as that has been its modus operandi throughout the pandemic.

Genuinely looking forward to Granny Danger coming on and dismissing this as "fishing for greenies"

[Honest_Man#1]

Looking at going to Italy. Notice that in addition to the PCR 2 day test (can’t remember if people had said we still have to use the NHS rip off £68 one or we can use private providers now?) you also have to have proof of a negative PCR or antigen test taken within 48 hours of departure to get entry to Italy. Does this mean you have to pay for another test? Or can I just go to a drop in centre and get tested the day before? Or does antigen mean lateral flow?

[welshbairn]

32 minutes ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

Looking at going to Italy. Notice that in addition to the PCR 2 day test (can’t remember if people had said we still have to use the NHS rip off £68 one or we can use private providers now?) you also have to have proof of a negative PCR or antigen test taken within 48 hours of departure to get entry to Italy. Does this mean you have to pay for another test? Or can I just go to a drop in centre and get tested the day before? Or does antigen mean lateral flow?

Antigen means LFT. You have to buy a private one, don't use Chronomics, I ordered one because I wasn't 100% whether I needed one for coming to Portugal via Holland, and it never arrived. Turned out I didn't need one but I had a hard time convincing Check in at Inverness of that. Don't book anything until the last minute, the rules change daily and you'll probably only need an LFT for Day 2.

P.S. As far as flying back to a Scottish airport goes, the only definite at the moment is that you don't need to use the rip off £68 one.

Edited October 26, 2021 by welshbairn

[welshbairn]

29 minutes ago, ICTChris said:

 

Bloody hell. 

It's rational to expect numbers to be down with all the stories of beasts going around spiking women with needles, the lower attendances might not all be down to vaccine passports.

Edited October 26, 2021 by welshbairn

[Wee Bully]

1 hour ago, Honest_Man#1 said:

Wee Bully.

Great post, unfortunately wasted on the poster it was in response to, as he’ll ignore it with fingers in ears as it reads horrendously for the SG.

Good to see the hard of thinking firing in.

I hadn’t responded because it didn’t contradict at an empirical level anything I have said.

1. The amount of people in his club were down 150, and not the 1 or 2 which were apparently mentioned in the Thread.  No-one on this thread said that 1 or 2 people were missing from his (or anyone else’s) Club.  Rather that 550 refused entry is 1 or 2 a venue.  

2. ”And bear in mind, the 35% drop isn’t wholly attributable to people actually knocked back at the door for not having proper certification, it’s also comprised of those who didn’t bother going out as they knew they wouldn’t get in (the vaccine passport scheme is hardly a well kept secret), and those who simply went somewhere they knew the enforcement would be laxer. “.  Unless he has spoken to the people who weren’t there, then this is just supposition. 

3. No-one said that the drop was due to the boycott, merely that it was another possibility.  It was pretty well publicised, and a lot of females I know have taken a stance on it, or just don’t feel safe going to Clubs at the moment.  

So,, all in all, moves the discussion not on a single bit.  

[Left Back]

32 minutes ago, oaksoft said:

She'll be trying to claim that the period between 7th and 21st Oct represents a rise.

Technically she's right but she abusing statistics here as that "rise" is basically not much more than zero.

If she'd made the claim prior to 21st Oct (and I agree it would still have been a complete abuse of statistics) she may have been technically correct but this was an interview last night.

[Bonksy+HisChristianParade]

Personally think that Wee Bully, aged 47, is highly likely to have his finger on the pulse as to how the boycott by young females affected pub/club trade at the weekend.