Whilst the polls show Brits remain cynical about Eurovision and think it is all about politics, some of us enjoy Eurovision for that reason, for the music and the betting opportunities.

With the elimination of the Former Yugoslavian states of Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, Serbia, Macedonia in the semi finals, and Bosnia and Herzegovina withdrawing from the contest, due to financial reasons, there’s a potential for less Balkan bloc voting this time around which could make the final result more open.

There are many opportunities available to bet on the song contest.

The Danish entry, is the overwhelming favourite, and has been for quite some time.

Fortunately there are betting markets for a winner without Denmark or going for an each way bet with Ladbrokes and Paddy Power.

My tips, apart from the Danes, are The Germans, who are represented by Cascada, a band that has enjoyed pop success in the UK, in the past.

I’ve also backed  The Ukrainian, Norwegian and  Irish entries.

I’m quite impressed by the Irish entry, for the last couple of years by sending Jedward, I’ve wondered if the Irish really wanted to win Eurovision. Short of sending Johnny Logan, I can’t see a clearer statement from the Irish that they want to win Eurovision this year.

It wouldn’t be Eurovision, without an entry that looks like something Borat has produced, and the Romanian entry meets that category.

What of the UK’s entry, this year?

I have to confess whilst being a fan of Bonnie Tyler, like Engelbert Humperdinck, I don’t expect her to do well, I suspect some of her 80s material would have done very well in Eurovision.

I have the expectation that she’ll finish 21st or lower, and have availed myself of Paddy Power, who offer evens on such an occurrence (Englerbert finished 25th last year)

Hopefully next year the BBC will allow the viewers to choose the artist/band who represents the UK in Eurovision 2014, and maybe some of the UK’s best artists and bands decide to be shortlisted for the honour, musical giants, such as The Rolling Stones, New Order, Emeli Sandé, The Stone Roses, Depeche Mode, Steps or Radiohead, and we can go back to the halcyon days when the likes of Bucks Fizz won.

For true fans of Eurovision, the main focus of attraction of the evening is not on the artists performing, or the voting, but that the news that Abba’s Benny Andersson and Bjorn Ulvaeus have teamed up with Swedish DJ and producer Avicii to produce the anthem for this year’s ceremony.

The Eurovision Song Contest starts at 8pm BST and will be on BBC 1 and BBC1 HD.

TSE

(Whose interest in and enjoyment of all things Eurovision has disturbed his friends for many years)

Northern Echo: We’ll always remember her #tomorrowspaperstoday twitter.com/hendopolis/sta…

— Neil Henderson (@hendopolis) April 17, 2013

With the passing of Margaret Thatcher, many obituaries have been written (or at least dusted off and had the dates filled in) alongside as many pieces about her time in power and that word that hangs over every politician, legacy.

What many of them will do at some point is refer to her as “The Grocer’s Daughter” (and this is the title of the first volume of John Campbell’s definitive biography of her, a book I highly recommend and this post is heavily influenced by) and that is rather characteristic of both how she governed, and how she is remembered.

It’s a nickname, obviously, which is a pretty rare status symbol in British politics; if being known by a single name is a sign of being properly known then a nickname is a step beyond even that (and Thatcher has at least a couple that are instantly recognisable). It speaks to one of Thatcher’s great strengths, her understanding of the power of image.

What many of the pieces will also do is drop into a personal recollection of how they experienced Thatcher, and I might as well indulge. I was born near the end of Thatcher’s premiership, so I have no memory of her time in power; I encountered her through second hand accounts, historical works, and news references, through the way people described her and the images they used.

This goes beyond the changes she made to her surface image; hair, clothes and vocal lessons (it’s become almost a rite of passage for prominent Tories to be portrayed with the Thatcher halo) to an identity she portrayed and a narrative she built onto it. It is this that makes her surprisingly hard to pin down, even what we know of her early life is clouded by a layer of public relations polish.

The Grocer’s Daughter was always her background, but it was burnished up and brought into the political arena for the 1975 leadership election and (as she would do more than once) wrong-footed her opponents as she slipped past them to victory, fighting on different ground that her opponents struggled to handle.

During her time in power she used this identity to great effect, she may have been banging the works of Hayek on the table but it was with shopping bags she made her case over inflation. It’s also the narrative of an outsider, ‘Margaret goes to Downing Street and continues to speak past and around the established channels direct to the ordinary people’ (as opposed to say the much more establishment identity as lawyer and wife of a millionaire businessman).

Her conversion to the economic policies that she’d become known for was a late one, sparked as it was by Keith Joseph in the mid-1970s after she’d already been an MP for 15 years, but that reality gave way to the narrative of principles learnt at the shop-counter and from house-wife budgeting leading to economic theory in parliament (never mind that until recently those experiences had pointed her in a very different direction).

If that identity was one she crafted, the second nickname that filled the obituaries was initially meant as an insult, but she adopted The Iron Lady moniker and she ran with it. Whether pictured in a tank or of the many representations of her that called back to the representations of warrior-queens, Boadicea, Elizabeth I, Britannia; she portrayed the matriarchal mother in a breastplate, doling out the tough medicine needed at home, and tougher vengeance on her enemies, but always in charge and ready for battle.

This image of the Iron Lady, armed with her handbag and always ready to take someone on is one that has resonated amongst her supporters and her critics ever since, whether they are praising her for her courage, or castigating her for her harshness. It’s also a further victory of narrative over reality.

To take the unions as an example, few now remember that in the early 1980s she faced a number of strikes where she either compromised or avoided battle. At one point she declared she’d resign rather than raise Civil Service pay more than 7%, some expensive strike filled time later she agreed to a 7.5% rise (a small but significant distance past her line in the sand).

Later on she was actually a restraining hand on some of her cabinet who wanted to go even further, the lesson of her clashes with the unions was not ‘fight them on the beaches’, it was ‘pick your battles’ and that sometimes a tactical retreat is the best option.

Politics is the art of the possible, as an Iron Chancellor once said, and in her career Margaret Thatcher was very aware of that fact, she negotiated, she compromised, and she did in fact u-turn. That she is remembered as unattainably great by her supporters (and created an unreal measuring stick to hit her successors over the head with) and implausibly awful by her opponents is an indication of the strength of her mythology, she is a legend in every sense of the word, devil and saint.

Her demonisation and canonisation are a testament not just to the long shadow she casts over British politics (that all leaders must wrestle with, and some of her successors have found a burden) but also to the strength of the identities and narratives she portrayed both in power and out.

Her legacy is as built as much upon these creations as the reality, so that stripping them away reveals more and more about Thatcher but less and less about Thatcherism. But the ability to exercise such power over the memory of her shows her as the master communicator she undoubtedly was.

Corporeal

In case you didn’t notice there was a by-election the other day in Eastleigh, and UKIP did rather well (as did some of our punters).

So now is the time to glance ahead at the markets for UKIP at the next general election, namely whether they will win a seat, and their percentage of the overall vote.

There’s been quite a colourful cast of parties who’ve had an election night triumph somewhere at sometime: Communists, Respect, Green, the Common Wealth party, and various independents have all had their moment while the nationalists in Wales and Scotland have established themselves in their respective heartlands (and that’s just since World War II, extend it before that and I could have included Scottish Prohibitionists, an Empire Free Trade Crusader, Anti-Waste league, Constitutionalists, etc).

UKIP have failed to add themselves to that list, they are historically bad at converting their seats into votes, no party in British electoral history has polled as well as they have (in either vote numbers or vote percentage) without winning at least a single seat (few have even got close).

Labrokes offer 1/3 odds that they won’t win a seat at the next General Election, 2/1 for them to succeed (with WilliamHill offering a 5/2 bet that they will win a seat).

For UKIP to not win a seat they’ll likely have to break their own record and go to new heights of futility, but there is not a seat in which they are well placed. Their best result in the last election was Farage’s attempt at unseating Bercow in Buckingham and that was a third place on 17% of the vote (and will likely go to waste since I doubt they’ll try it again).

In no other seat did they crack 10%, and in only a few were they even close. The kind of rises they’d need in a given seat to win it are very difficult to achieve, particularly if you don’t have a built up local organisation.

I should note here that I don’t have in-depth knowledge of UKIP’s local capabilities, but their reputation as local campaigners is poor and the recent-ness of their surge points against much of a ground network. A by-election obviously allows for a concentration of resources (and if they want to focus on seat winning they should adopt a similar strategy at the next GE; whether they do, and how effectively they can do so will be interesting to watch).

Some serious long term seat building is required on their part, at the least the odds aren’t tempting enough to brave the variability of seat markets.

The odds I do think are very tempting however, are the Ladbrokes odds on UKIP’s overall vote percentage.

At the 2010 General Election UKIP matched their opinion polling and hit 3% of the total vote standing in 558 seats (the main 3 parties stood in 631). As far as I’m aware they intend to stand in every seat at the next election and while they will probably perform poorly in these seats it’ll provide a boost. Alongside that they are polling slightly higher than 3% these days. 5% should be very achievable.

My humble betting advice would be to leave the 0-5% range and spread some money about between 5 and 15%. Not only because of their positive prospects, but also the odds are likely to shorten further. With the European Elections next year likely to put UKIP’s success in the spotlight and provide some hedging opportunities to cover all eventualities.

Corporeal

The Three letters of David Cameron

When David Cameron won the Conservative party leadership contest he said he could state his priorities in three letters: NHS. More than any other issue, from the Big Society to hugging huskies in hoodies, he’s tried to connect himself to the state of healthcare in this country.

While prescribing declaring cuts had to take place in almost every other department he declared he would protect the NHS by ring-fencing its budget. It is a personal crusade (he has talked about how his experiences with his son made the issue so important to him), it is central to his campaign to de-toxify the Conservative party, with the Stafford hospital report published it is very much on the agenda.

From a polling standpoint on YouGov’s issues tracker it ranks as the 2nd most important issue facing ‘you and your family’ (behind the economy) and 3rd facing the country (behind economy and immigration).

But has Cameron’s focus on the issue been successful?

Or at least has it been popular (in politics the two are so entwined with each other). Below are graphs tracking the Conservative score, and Conservative lead (either positive or negative) over Labour, I’ve drawn them from YouGov’s recent tracker (which since early 2010 has regularly been tracking issue ratings, and infrequently in between 2005 and 2010) and Ipsos Mori’s unparalleled historical data which covers a much longer time span but always infrequently.

Firstly the YouGov data:

What we can see here is just how badly the Conservatives have rated on the NHS, since 2005 and including 75 polls taken since the start of 2010, they have one instance of being level with Labour, and three of leading them (with leads of 1, 1, and 3). The other 71 polls have them behind (even while they were leading in voting intention polls).

Cameron’s time as Leader of the Opposition up to the early years of his premiership show some sustained improvement in the Conservative ratings (and that helping to drive a similar level of improvement in the gap to Labour) with the caveat that given how the polls since 2010 jump around the infrequency of the polling 05-10 casts a bit of doubt on reading too much into it.

From the start of 2010 we have much more frequent data that places them mildly behind Labour up until the election and improving after the election through to that autumn, but then turns downwards and heads below even the 2005 ratings.

(The separate lines indicate a change of methodology, before 1988 the question was about the National Health Service, from the start of 1988 the question referred to “Health Care”).

What the longer historical perspective offers is a suggestion that Cameron is still performing relatively well even after his decline, remaining higher than all the ratings apart from Major’s stretch before the 1992 election and his peak the highest Conservative rating of the past 25 years (and comes outside of election time, while the other Conservative high points cluster around elections).

The leads (fairly unsurprisingly) tell a broadly similar story, that Cameron’s worst result (or conversely Miliband’s biggest lead) is better than any other since the 1980s.

That is certainly the most positive way of interpreting this data (it also depends on how much you think the change in wording has changed the results) but for all Cameron’s efforts on what in many ways has been his flagship project, I think he’ll view these figures (and hello to Dave if he’s reading, or Samantha for that matter) with some disappointment.

Corporeal

So, what lies ahead for politics in 2013? Pausing only to admire my willingness to have a go, given my mediocre track record in predictions, let’s get stuck in.

The current state of play

Where are we now?

For this, I can borrow wholesale from my summary from last year.

1. The public doesn’t approve of the Coalition.
2. The public doesn’t much like David Cameron.
3. The public really doesn’t like Nick Clegg.
4. The public doesn’t rate Ed Miliband either.
5. The public doesn’t like the EU. Surveys show that more people want to leave the EU than remain in it.
6. In fact, it’s very hard to find anyone or anything at all that the public approves of right now. (Apart from the Queen and the Royal Family. The public love the Queen.)

But some things have changed a bit. Ed Miliband isn’t disliked as much as he was a year ago, while the gilt has continued to come off David Cameron’s gingerbread (though David Cameron and George Osborne retain a substantial lead on economic trust over the two Eds). Boris Johnson had a gala year, but has ended it with his star dimmed in the eyes of the headbangers because of his apostasy on matters connected to the EU.

Alex Salmond had a pretty mediocre year on the UK stage, saved only by the dismal quality of his Scottish opponents. The suspicion persists that he’s a flat track bully, too easily found out when he tries to take the step up against more serious opposition. And UKIP have definitely taken a step forward this year, consistently polling near or ahead of the Lib Dems in the polls, and having made some impact in by-elections.

Economically, Britain had a pretty dismal year. The best that can be said is that some other countries had grimmer years. But it was not a land of milk and honey. Employment is rising, unemployment is falling, but real incomes continue to decline. Growth remains fragile and the deficit remains stubbornly high.

On the plus side, the Eurozone did not collapse. That’s a much bigger achievement than seems to be acknowledged. It is leading to a financial union of the Eurozone, with Britain on the outside. The implications of this have not begun to be understood either in Britain or in the rest of the EU.

So, what’s next? Last year, I concluded that when no one commands public support, the public follow Newton’s First Law of Motion, proceeding in a straight line with no outside force operating on them. I stand by this judgement. If this is correct, then we should not expect events by themselves to make much difference until sections of the public are persuaded from their current default settings by the analysis of those events put forward by one or more public figures. Or, as happened this year, where one of the parties scores an own goal.

2013 has fewer set piece big events than 2012 that can already be foreseen, but three stand out as of particular importance:

1. The fiscal cliff

As I write, the news media are full of stories of the Republicans and Barack Obama’s failure so far to agree on how to avoid the fiscal cliff leading to a massive tightening of US policy. Whether or not agreement is reached by 1 January 2013 (I doubt it), some form of resolution will ultimately be reached, largely on Barack Obama’s terms – because he’s won the battle of public opinion in the USA and the Republicans will need to avoid lasting blame. This is likely to have a very substantial impact on the debate in the UK on the proper treatment of deficit reduction vs growth. This could be shaped by either George Osborne or Ed Balls in their favour if grasped quickly.

In practice, I expect neither to gain a competitive advantage by themselves, which means that the media will be decisive. I expect that on balance the press will regard this as giving more weight to Ed Balls’s “too far too fast” narrative, which may in turn mean that Labour gain some points in economic credibility.

2 The Royal baby

In the summer, assuming that the Royal pregnancy proceeds as we all hope, we shall succumb to Royal baby mania. Republicans may wish to check likely dates in order to book their holidays now.

While this story is not of direct political relevance, the papers are likely to spend some time considering the prospects for children born today. The coalition looks weak on family-friendliness. This may in turn give a nudge in Labour’s favour.

3. The German election

Germany will hold its federal elections in September or October. At present, Angela Merkel looks likely to win. But whoever wins, the new Government will be ready to take a more dynamic position regarding the Eurozone and its future. The end of the year is likely to be taken up (again) with interminable discussions about the future of the EU, and Britain’s place in it. I’m sure you can’t wait.

More generally, there is no obvious sign that Britain’s economy is going to start improving dramatically any time soon. There are a few recent signs that George Osborne is getting better at expectations management.

North of the border, the debate over Scottish independence will continue. To date, the NO side has been very effective with its message of fear, uncertainty and doubt, aided by some entirely avoidable blunders by the SNP.

Predictions

OK, time to bite the bullet. In a year where there are relatively few British political events scheduled, I suppose it should be harder to get too much wrong (famous last words).

Labour will keep and perhaps increase its lead in the polls

If the economy doesn’t improve, faith in the coalition’s policies will continue to wane. I have already noted two reasons why Labour may get additional support in the polls, and neither the Conservatives nor the Lib Dems are doing particularly well at media management, to say the least. Labour are not doing anything brilliant, and the public are not going to fall in love with them, but there aren’t too many options out there for the disaffected, and Labour remains the obvious one.

UKIP will rise further in the polls

The EU is going to be in the news a lot this year, from discussions about Romanian and Bulgarian migrants, Croatia’s accession on 1 July (another country to supply immigrants?), budgets, fiscal union and its consequences to Britain’s role in the new European order. Aided and abetted by the continuing hysteria of the Tory right acting as a fifth column, UKIP will pick up its share of the disaffected. Nothing David Cameron can say or do will ever satisfy the hardliners, of course.

But don’t expect major changes in the identity of Britain’s politicians

This will be another year where our top politicians stay put. Barring mortality, personal decision or unforeseen scandal, all three party leaders look safe enough for the coming year. David Cameron is likely to come under most pressure, but in the absence of a remotely credible rival, he should be safe enough (even in the Conservative party, which is addicted to plotting).

The Cabinet is unlikely to undergo a major reshuffle (it’s too complicated and anyway David Cameron doesn’t seem to believe in reshuffling endlessly). Will Andrew Mitchell or Chris Huhne return? Chris Huhne will have firmer party support if he rebuts the charges against him, but it would be easier to accommodate Andrew Mitchell (there are more Conservatives in Cabinet to eject). In practice, I expect both will find their political aspirations in 2013 progressing outside the Cabinet, unless others blot their copybook and create the necessary space.

The cause of Scottish independence will continue to languish

2012 showed that the SNP are nowhere near ready enough with their ideas as to what an independent Scotland would look like, or even what the route to independence would look like. Unless they can get a grip on this very quickly in 2013, the public will decide that it’s all just too big a gamble. Since there is no sign at present of them doing so, I expect the polls to look pretty dreary for the independence cause.

antifrank

This article first appeared on PB Channel 2

antifrank is a long standing contributor to PB, he would also like to stress, this piece was written mainly to help him form his own views as to what to expect, he doesn’t want anyone thinking he’s any kind of oracle.

James Kelly looks at the various scenarios.

Guest slot by David Lenton.

Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the last 12 months then I’m sure you’ve heard of Julian Assange – you know that kinda weird looking guy from Wiki Leaks? Anyway in what can only be described as a self serving publicity stunt online bookmaker Stan James have decided it’s time to open up two betting markets surrounding Ecuador’s latest and greatest.

How Will Assange Leave The Ecuadorian Embassy?

The first of the two markets punters will be flocking to is entitled ‘How Will Julian Assange Leave The Ecuadorian Embassy?’ and currently betting options include:

In a British Police Car – priced at a somewhat stingy 6/5

In an Ecuadorian State Car – priced up at 13/8

In a Diplomatic Crate or Bag – priced longer at 4/1

Helicopter – currently up at 7/1

Ambulance – which is 10/1

Tunnel – a speculative 50/1

London Black Cab – in his dreams priced at 66/1

Batmobile – priced at 200/1

After a quick look through the market I’m pretty sure we can rule out Tunnel and Batmobile although the 200/1 would be a nice little pay day. Black Cab is the option next I’m striking off as I’m pretty sure Wiki Leaks is a non profit organisation so there’s no way he’s affording this and in an ambulance just isn’t going to happen either especially now the entire world is watching. A quick Google search for ‘Ecuadorian embassy helipad’ yields information detailing the minute size of the embassy and the fact that it doesn’t even have a car park so unless he is winched out of there this isn’t happening. I’m not parting with my cash at 7/1 when they don’t even have a legitimate landing zone.

This leaves us with three options; British police car, Ecuadorian state car and diplomatic crate which for those of you who don’t know is some kind of container with diplomatic immunity from search or seizure and yes as you’ve probably guessed this isn’t going happen either.

What it boils down to is whether or not the powers that be cave to the mounting support for Assange or they extradite him to Sweden to face up to various charges including those of sexual assault. Given that it’s about 1,000,000/1 that Sweden would extradite Assange to the US to face the death penalty I’m swaying towards British police car at 13/8. The astute among you will have noticed that Stan James clearly state *others available on request so perhaps on foot might actually be the best bet available…

When Will Julian Assange Leave The Ecuadorian Embassy?

The second market Stan James has is entitled ‘When Will Julian Assange Leave The Ecuadorian Embassy?’ and currently options for this mouth watering betting feast include:

August 2012 to November 2012 – 13/8

November 2012 to February 2013 – 6/4

March 2013 to July 2013 – 11/4

August 2012 to August 2014 – 5/1

September 2014 or later – 10/1

Even though Rafael Correa Ecuador’s current president has said that Julian Assange can stay in the embassy indefinitely at some stage he’s going to have to move on and while Correa sees this as a stand against Anglo-American Imperialism I’m pretty sure the UK government just sees it as a pain in the neck.

For many this saga has dragged on long enough and it doesn’t show any immediate signs of coming to a conclusion which for me rules of option 1 of August 2012 to November 2012 priced up at 13/8. On the flip side of the coin September 2014 or later doesn’t appear viable either as the UK government will want a resolution to this situation to avoid more media criticism, speculation, and sensationalism. Not to mention that eventually the cost of keeping the man there will eventually hit the news if the situation remains unresolved and we all know what a hyper sensitive topic that is at the moment.

This leaves either November 2012 to February 2013 priced at 6/4 and March 2013 to July 2013 priced at 11/4. Mounting pressure for a resolution will come well before March 2013 rolls around so the 6/4 on November 2012 to February 2013 is where my money would be going.

How much of my money will be going there … what’s the minimum bet at Stan James again?

David Lenton is the editor of the website cheekypunter.com

A guest slot by Financier

The London Olympics has witnessed a magnificent competition by the global family of athletes (of many disciplines) who have strived for just three prizes in each event: gold, silver and bronze. There were no prizes for a plucky loser, no medals for a good effort and no award for “well-tried.”  If you lost, then you lost. For many, it was quite apparent that the privilege of representing their country at the Olympics was the biggest prize of all.

However, it was noticeable that in their post-event interviews, the losers took personal responsibility for their result – they did not blame their coach, the weather, the track – indeed many were very apologetic for (in their eyes) letting down their supporters and country. All had shown enviable self-discipline and hard work in their training to reach the entry standards required.

How refreshing are their attitudes and humility when compared with the excuses given by many public bodies when things go wrong: “We will take the positives out of this” or “We will learn the lessons.” What have they been doing in the meantime?

The strap-line for these games is “Inspire a Generation.” So  how could UK Ltd, battling for a place in the global economy, learn from the example of these losing athletes?

Politicians – at all levels – why not be truthful about the real state of affairs instead of spinning a line for political gain – why not focus on solving the real problems of theUKrather than clinging to an outdated and failed ideology. Just tell it like it is – people respect the truth, however tough it is, put the people first before political and personal ambitions.

We read of a continuing decline in our education standards, of slipping down the world league tables, whilst politicians and educationalists (scared of being found out?) acclaim ever increasing pass rates at the same time as more children leave school neither literate nor numerate and thus not employable.

Why are so many schools and council education chiefs happy to preside over fourth-rate education and not seek excellence for every pupil? It does not cost money but does require good leadership, inspiring teaching and good communication. At the same time, councils are happy to pursue parents who may live just outside the “zone” – such councils have the wrong priorities – but then it is easier to track parents then bring a sink school up to excellence.

UK requires a growth in exports to non-EU countries. Many SMEs have products and services that are in demand overseas – they just have to ensure these goods are of a superior standard and the world will come knocking at their door, as long as you keep innovating. Yet too many are put off by the supposed-terrors of trade finance, a foreign language and business culture – all of these are surmountable – with a little bit of free help from the Department of Business (if it was led properly) and the FO.

Other public-facing bodies in utilities, care and health have exhibited abject standards that have horrified the nation. It would appear that the customer is almost regarded as a nuisance that has to be endured rather then served with pride.

We have heard of the Chinese ‘tiger’ mother who when her child returns from school with news of a 90% mark in a subject, praises the child and then says “what about that other 10%” and follows up with teaching that last 10%.

The UK had that attitude once – the pursuit of excellence.  Miners would rejoice when their children were educated and would not have to go down the pit, other adults would go to evening classes to gain qualifications to improve themselves. Now we have increasing truancy and official surprise at declining standards – have the politicians been asleep or living in a fantasy world of self-deception?

So what about PB, which is gaining reputation for political debate. How can we improve – perhaps far less smearing and sneering from certain parties – you know who you are – and more thoughtful and weighed debate that will enhance the reputation of this site and confront the status quo.  PB could become the major think-tank ofUKpolitics.

And each PBer? We have a duty to challenge and question the establishment, make a nuisance of ourselves to our MP and council and vitally to encourage and help our young people to aspire to excellence – whether they are family or not.

Financier is regular poster on PB, and this is the first in the series of guest slots by him on PB this week.