The story is in the Daily Star, so there’s a strong likelihood that there’s more factual content in a copy of Viz.
3 Likes
Speaking of Viz, is there any decent humour about this yet?
The Daily Mash have been a bit weak.
I think the 5000 limit is on indoor events.
Depending on how things pan out in the next 3 months, I could see a situation where the Olympics become a TV-only event with no spectators in the venues. The big teams already run pre-Games holding camps before their athletes move to the Olympic village, so if you put on something similar for the smaller nations you could ensure that everyone is virus-free before arriving at the Games.
I don’t think it’s practical to postpone or re-schedule the Olympics. You either have them when they are scheduled or you cancel them altogether. There’s too many other events to clash with if you try to move them and you can’t just mothball everything until a more suitable time.
Moto GP have cancelled the premier class in Qatar but will still be running Moto 2 & 3 as they are already there testing.
Personally, I do wonder how much that had to do with Ducati though, who only run in Moto GP, not the lower classes.
Dammit; we had Japan all booked. Business class return tickets for the family etc 
Tardozzi has always been good at stamping his feet and getting his way.
1 Like
I’m with you on this - no one is taking our dogs away from us just because they “might” be able to carry what is essentially a flu virus.
I don’t know how accurate it is, but there was a story going around on twitter about people in China throwing their dogs and cats out of tower block windows because they were worried that they’d give them the virus 
1 Like
Interesting economic analysis from Deloitte came out this morning.
A personal view from Ian Stewart, Deloitte’s Chief Economist in the UK. To subscribe and/or view previous editions just google ‘Deloitte Monday Briefing’.
-
Last week equity markets concluded that the spread of coronavirus has major implications for economic growth and corporate profits. Last week’s sell-off in US equities was the sharpest correction since the Great Depression in 1933. It is a measure of the concern of markets that the immediate reaction of US equities was greater than when news of the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers broke in 2008.
-
Markets face three related unknowns: the path and virulence of the virus, its effects on movement and on economic activity and the response of policymakers.
-
The world has plenty of experience of dealing with infectious diseases. The twentieth century witnessed three major flu pandemics: in 1918, 1958–59 and 1968. In a pandemic the disease spreads globally and a high proportion of the population are infected. The swine flu (H1N1) pandemic of 2009 is estimated to have infected in excess of 10% of the world population, but with relatively low death rates. Infections from avian flu (H5N1) since 1997 and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in 2002–03 have been on a lesser scale, though they have been economically disruptive, especially in some Asian countries.
-
The research into the impact of such outbreaks finds that the greatest economic effects come from reductions in movement, not from illness and deaths themselves. A 2009 study which modelled the economic effects of a UK pandemic concluded, “although the direct economic impact of disease is relatively small, school closures and prophylactic absenteeism, whether imposed by government or the result of fear of infection in the population, could greatly increase the economic impact” (British Medical Journal, November 2009).
-
This is partly about the decisions made by government, local authorities and employers – for instance Japan’s decision to close schools for two months, the cancellation of the Geneva Motor Show or the quarantine of 11 northern Italian cities. But it is at least as much about the judgements made by individuals and families as they assess the news. These decisions shape consumer spending and patterns of work.
-
The model of travel restrictions and quarantine followed in the last two months by China is not necessarily desirable or practical in the West. Here the authorities would need to balance the health benefits of such measures against the aim of maintaining a degree of business as usual.
-
The initial effects of reductions in mobility have been seen in leisure activities, travel and tourism. Last week Lufthansa said it was reducing short-haul flights by up to 25%. IAG, owner of BA, said the uncertainty meant it was unable to provide profit guidance for 2020.
-
In China travel and quarantine restrictions have limited the ability of workers to get to their factories and offices. Chinese growth in the first quarter will slow sharply and could contract. This makes a wider point. Even the regular seasonal pattern of change, such as the timing of public holidays, hot or wet weather, New Year sales and so on, cause significant volatility in monthly economic data. A shock, like coronavirus, whose path is unknowable, will make the economic data more erratic, clouding underlying trends.
-
Global activity is dependent on a web of cross-border supply chains, financial and transport networks. When things go wrong this interconnectedness amplifies and transmits stress globally, much as happened during the financial crisis. Last week the Financial Times reported that disruption to production at a northern Italian components parts manufacturer, MTA, could force closures at car plants across Europe. The car maker JLR has been shipping components from China by plane in suitcases to help keep production at its UK plants going. Last week Apple warned that its profits would suffer in the first quarter because of disruption in China.
-
Elevated levels of external uncertainty dampen corporate risk taking and spending. Brexit-related uncertainties have had a marked impact on corporate investment in the UK in the last three years. Rising protectionism, and the associated costs and uncertainties, have knocked manufacturing globally. Coronavirus represents a potent new source of uncertainty for business. Some are likely to react by shelving expansion plans and focussing on strengthening balance sheets.
-
The economic effects of coronavirus will depend partly on the response of the authorities. Some argue that coronavirus is a classic supply shock – one which limits the supply of goods and services due to supply chain disruption and workers staying at home. The argument runs that this sort of problem cannot be remedied by cutting interest rates, a measure which is designed to boost demand.
-
This rather misses the point. Of course central banks are unable to counter supply disruptions. Yet coronavirus is also likely to depress business confidence, reduce corporate cash flow and cause financial conditions to tighten. Cheaper money and more liquidity would help counter these problems. Financial markets agree. They are now pricing an 80% probability of the US Federal Reserve cutting interest rates four times this year – a massive easing of policy that would have been almost unimaginable two weeks ago. In an unusual move the chair of the Fed last Friday said the Fed was considering reducing interest rates in response to the spread of coronavirus.
-
Central banks will be watching financial conditions carefully. The Chinese authorities have pumped an additional $174bn of liquidity into money markets in the last month. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks the Fed flooded the financial system with liquidity and urged banks not to foreclose on borrowers with temporary liquidity problems. The Fed’s aim was to prevent disruption to the payments system and cash flow which could mutate into a wider financial crisis. This time round the authorities could help companies with cash flow problems weather the loss of revenues by extending loans and liquidity.
-
Hong Kong’s government last week unveiled an unorthodox fiscal response to coronavirus. It is giving each adult permanent resident just under $1,300 in cash and is cutting payroll taxes for 2m workers. Hong Kong’s economy is already in a fragile condition, growth having contracted by 1.2% last year due to political unrest and US-China trade tensions. Yesterday the Italian government announced it would spend an extra €3.6bn, equivalent to 0.2% of GDP, on tax measures to help companies suffering a sharp decline in revenues and on increased health spending. Other countries seem likely to follow suit and increase public borrowing and spending to boost growth.
-
Coronavirus will have significant negative effects on global growth in the short term. China’s economy will weaken sharply in the first quarter. The official Chinese purchasing managers index for February showed manufacturing activity contracted at its fastest-ever pace in February. The Italian economy, having contracted in the fourth quarter and with growth suffering now, is at risk of falling into a technical recession. Economists have been busy scaling back their forecasts for growth this year. Last week Bank of America Merrill Lynch cut its full-year 2020 forecasts for euro area GDP growth from 1.0% to 0.6% and for global growth from 3.1% to 2.8%.
-
The big question is whether the shock will be sufficient to knock the global economy into something worse. Much will depend on the persistence of the virus. But the evidence from past diseases is that some of the activity that is lost is pushed back later into the year, with a trough in activity followed by a bounce. Easier fiscal and monetary policy would help that rebound. External shocks, such as diseases, have significant economic effects, but they tend not to change the trajectory of the economic cycle.
-
In China the government believes that the epidemic is starting to come under control and that, where possible, people should get back to work. High frequency economic data, on coal consumption and car traffic, suggest that activity is slowly starting to pick up. A continuation of that slow recovery depends on containing the virus.
-
Then there are the longer term implications of coronavirus. It has the potential to become a major issue in the US presidential election, pitting an ardent advocate of private health care against supporters of greater government involvement. And the spread of the virus is another blow for global integration. The greatest economic effect of coronavirus could yet be to weaken globalisation.
2 Likes
that could scupper an event I’m a TO at - the Indoor Triathlon Festival at Lieven on 20th March. No idea of how many spectators they are expecting, but the arena can hold up to 14000.
My friend at work has a GFA entry for London Marathon, she reckons she won’t be going because it will be cancelled.I wonder if Newport will be on.
Interesting, thanks.
Personally I’m not sure why the response has been this fearful compared to past events. But the market impact is all about what people feel, not what actually is, so in this case - it doesn’t matter(!)
Still, if I’m right it’s still interesting to see what our global pandemic response capability is. And though it’s nice not to be listening to terrorism and Brexit for a while, surely they could have picked something else.
I’ve got a meeting at 2 about what we can or can’t do if we have to WFH if there’s an outbreak, on the assumption they still carry on with lectures etc.
A friend from the club has the same, although she’s not too bothered if it does get cancelled as she started her training late.
With it centred in China, I guess it’s position as #1 manufacturer means the general economic impact is likely to be much greater?
1 Like
Stock markets are always like that. They think there will be an issue so they dump stocks before they drop. China seems to be a big concern. NASA have detected differences in the pollution over China due to factories closing etc so stuff is happening.
1 Like
Maybe this will help us to buy more local products. Bring back the Corona man and his glass bottles! Oh the Irony 
2 Likes
Good analysis.
At the end of the day…it’s serious…but…
-
It’s a bug. We have had bugs before and will have new ones in the future. Seems to me that outwith China, fear is driving things here. Bugs kill humans. Most humans will likely survive. It is what it is. If society was more focused on stability and cohesion, as opposed to money and I’m all right Jack, it would be much less of an issue. But again it is what it is. Immunity will come from catching it and recovering or vaccinations which will take time. As the climate continues to change expect more novel bugs wrecking human harm, as our bodies try to keep up.
-
Yes it could tripstart a global recession/depression. But that is, I think, more likely next year (or later with another bug). But that is guesswork by me. But the mechanisms by which something like this could destroy an economy or the global economy are fairly obvious. Again fear and panic would be significant factors (bearing in mind most people have mild symptoms). We obviously have an economic hit this year, but the real bad hit, if it happens, would be next winter onwards (I won’t bore you with my reasoning).
-
What really surprises me is that Las Vegas has no reported cases. Ok there is the travel ban Trump introduced (which must be hurting almost all whale business in the desert). But it’s a global travel magnet, that in turn connects heavily across the US, especially California and tech businesses and also to the East Coast (perhaps not so much nowadays). If LV got it bad that could in turn devastate the US fast.
The conspiracy theorists must be loving this turn of events. While populist politicians make hay. It’s serious don’t get me wrong, especially for China, but we in the West seem a bit panicked and fearful over something most of us may end up catching at some stage, and which for most people is mild in symptoms and most recover from.
Don’t panic. Don’t let fear control you (easier said than done I know). Keep perspective. The common cold could kill you. So could crossing the road. However you slice and dice this it will take time for immunity to build (if it can) or simply die off. In the meantime don’t turn a drama into a crisis.
If we lived in a world of Ma’at and not financial me, me, me, this would be all more manageable (I won’t bore you with the reasoning).
1 Like
Commercial Union 
3 Likes
Haven’t all of these recent flu pandemics originated in that part of the world? SARS, swine flu, bird flu
1 Like
My daughter asked me about this so I looked into it.
One virus can combine with another virus. It’s the proximity of animals and humans that creates the opportunity for viruses to change like this. You get someone with a cold working with sick animals, the viruses combine and hey presto - a new virus no one is immune to.
I’ve simplified obviously, but one thing that’s going to increase the likelihood of new diseases is lots and lots of people close to lots and lots of animals. Which is exactly what you e got in a china.