UK & EU Agree Post-Brexit Trade Deal

Originally Posted by Mr K

We're in retreat on our fish demands...
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics...ichel-barnier/

Why so confrontational?

It’s better for everyone if a deal is agreed - using emotive terms just winds people up.

[1andrew1]

Potential Brexit benefit for animal rights

Live animal exports to be banned in England and Wales

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55167473

---------- Post added at 10:16 ---------- Previous post was at 09:56 ----------

Originally Posted by Pierre

No they won’t.

Who won't do what?

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Potential Brexit benefit for animal rights

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-55167473

---------- Post added at 10:16 ---------- Previous post was at 09:56 ----------


Who won't do what?

They

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Who won't do what?

Read your post, read my answer - it’s quite simple.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

Read your post, read my answer - it’s quite simple.

Re-read my post, it's reproduced below to make it simple:

1andrew1 Not any price - if prices rise by 20% then demand will fall as people move to alternatives.

Or fishermen will have to absorb the 20% taxes and additional paperwork costs. If they have the margins.

Pierre No they won’t.

Your response benefits from the skill of mind-reading which few of us on this forum are luck enough to possess.

Put simply, your response could mean several things:
- Prices won't rise by 20%
- People will not move to alternatives
- Fishermen won't have to absorb the 20% taxes and paperwork costs
- Fishermen don't have the margins.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

Re-read my post, it's reproduced below to make it simple:





Your response benefits from the skill of mind-reading which few of us on this forum are luck enough to possess.

Put simply, your response could mean several things:
- Prices won't rise by 20%
- People will not move to alternatives
- Fishermen won't have to absorb the 20% taxes and paperwork costs
- Fishermen don't have the margins.

The 3rd one, obviously.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Pierre

The 3rd one, obviously.

That assumes that fishermen do not charge the maximum price they can for their catches.

Interesting.

You do realise that an individual, reasonably large langoustine only works out at something like £1-2 at a wholesale trader’s fish market? You are literally talking about 20 or 40 pence difference in price per individual. If that price is passed all the way along to the restaurant menu it will make precisely smeg-all difference to someone who fancies ordering langoustine for their dinner.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Chris

You do realise that an individual, reasonably large langoustine only works out at something like £1-2 at a wholesale trader’s fish market? You are literally talking about 20 or 40 pence difference in price per individual. If that price is passed all the way along to the restaurant menu it will make precisely smeg-all difference to someone who fancies ordering langoustine for their dinner.

If it makes no difference to the diners, why aren't fishermen charging that higher price now? Capitalism is about charging the price that maximises profit, not just looking at your costs and adding a margin. If fishermen can't charge 20% more now, what makes you expect them to be able to charge more in the future and make the same sales?

Originally Posted by 1andrew1

If it makes no difference to the diners, why aren't fishermen charging that higher price now? Capitalism is about charging the price that maximises profit, not just looking at your costs and adding a margin. If fishermen can't charge 20% more now, what makes you expect them to be able to charge more in the future and make the same sales?

Your definition of capitalism is way off the mark.

The seller of a product will indeed want to maximise profit, however the desire to do this is only part of the equation. Actually doing it in a competitive market is a whole other proposition.

Capitalism depends on supply and demand. Nobody can simply put their prices up unless they hold a monopoly, and monopolies are extremely difficult to sustain. So is price fixing, and that’s what would have to happen for every fisherman to put their prices up by 20% at the same time. This is illegal.

For any one or two fishermen to raise prices would simply result in them losing business. Unless theirs was a higher quality product, it would simply not sell until all the cheaper stuff had gone.

An import duty that amounts to perhaps 40p on the wholesale price of a good quality langoustine just isn’t going to have an impact on restaurants if all of them have to put the price up at the same time. In a half-decent British seafood restaurant* you would pay £25 for a dish of langoustine, and maybe get 5 or 6 “tails” on the plate. That adds £1 or £2 to the price of what was already the most expensive thing on the menu. People who were already prepared to order the most expensive dish do not choose not to do so for the sake of £1 or £2 more.

*And yes I know British restaurants won’t be affected by tariffs on British-caught langoustine, it’s just easier to use local prices for illustration.

[Mr K]

Unless KFC do Languistine can't see it being an issue for Brexit Britain. Let the French have it, at least they appreciate it.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Chris

Your definition of capitalism is way off the mark.

The seller of a product will indeed want to maximise profit, however the desire to do this is only part of the equation. Actually doing it in a competitive market is a whole other proposition.

Capitalism depends on supply and demand. Nobody can simply put their prices up unless they hold a monopoly, and monopolies are extremely difficult to sustain. So is price fixing, and that’s what would have to happen for every fisherman to put their prices up by 20% at the same time. This is illegal.

For any one or two fishermen to raise prices would simply result in them losing business. Unless theirs was a higher quality product, it would simply not sell until all the cheaper stuff had gone.

An import duty that amounts to perhaps 40p on the wholesale price of a good quality langoustine just isn’t going to have an impact on restaurants if all of them have to put the price up at the same time. In a half-decent British seafood restaurant* you would pay £25 for a dish of langoustine, and maybe get 5 or 6 “tails” on the plate. That adds £1 or £2 to the price of what was already the most expensive thing on the menu. People who were already prepared to order the most expensive dish do not choose not to do so for the sake of £1 or £2 more.

*And yes I know British restaurants won’t be affected by tariffs on British-caught langoustine, it’s just easier to use local prices for illustration.

As usual Chris is correct, my favourite treat when we could eat out is a nice fillet steak and I’ve paid anywhere between £20 - £35 for one, depending on the establishment.

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Chris

Your definition of capitalism is way off the mark.

The seller of a product will indeed want to maximise profit, however the desire to do this is only part of the equation. Actually doing it in a competitive market is a whole other proposition.

Capitalism depends on supply and demand. Nobody can simply put their prices up unless they hold a monopoly, and monopolies are extremely difficult to sustain. So is price fixing, and that’s what would have to happen for every fisherman to put their prices up by 20% at the same time. This is illegal.

For any one or two fishermen to raise prices would simply result in them losing business. Unless theirs was a higher quality product, it would simply not sell until all the cheaper stuff had gone.

An import duty that amounts to perhaps 40p on the wholesale price of a good quality langoustine just isn’t going to have an impact on restaurants if all of them have to put the price up at the same time. In a half-decent British seafood restaurant* you would pay £25 for a dish of langoustine, and maybe get 5 or 6 “tails” on the plate. That adds £1 or £2 to the price of what was already the most expensive thing on the menu. People who were already prepared to order the most expensive dish do not choose not to do so for the sake of £1 or £2 more.

*And yes I know British restaurants won’t be affected by tariffs on British-caught langoustine, it’s just easier to use local prices for illustration.

No worries on the currency you've chosen to make your point.

Capitalism depends on supply and demand, agreed, but most goods will see a decrease in sales if prices increase. I don't think languistine is immune to this rule though the decrease may be less substantial than other things. (The exception being things like water bills which are monopoly providers of essential services.)

If tariffs of 20% are applied then unless all fishermen put their prices up simultaneously which could look like collusion and is unlikely, some will put their prices up by the full amount whilst other will put them up by a smaller amount or not at all hoping to increase market share. Thus contradictuing Pierre's assertion that none will absorb any of the costs.

The tariffs are applied to the export consignment, not the quayside wholesaler. There is no visible difference as far as fishermen catching in British waters and landing in British ports are concerned, unless the export purchasers attempt to drive the price they're prepared to pay down by 20% to allow for the tariff they are then going to have to pay. That is unlikely to happen though, because the British fishermen will be in control of the market and the exporters will not easily be able to fulfil demand from restaurants in France from other sources.

Conversely, if the UK concedes a significant amount of fishing permission to the EU it is possible that certain fish demand could be satisfied by EU trawlers fishing in British waters, then landing the catch in EU ports. No tariff is then due. Hence why this is such a vexed issue.

[RichardCoulter]

Seen lots of posts in the outer world saying that, even with a deal, they think that there will be interruptions to supply chains. Some are starting to stockpile.

I can see a surge in panic buying after Christmas leading up to the 31st, then after New Years Day, whether this comes to fruition or not, the shops being quiet.

I've been gradually increasing my stock of food and pet food, so now have a few big boxes to see me through the worst.