The #FXrigging scandal has resulted in yet another ‘Regulator Raid’ on global financial services. This time, with the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (Finma), joining the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) and the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, (OCC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) in grabbing cash that goes to national treasuries.

The nub of the story is that various nefarious groups within a consortium of banks sought to peg the 4PM London foreign currency (FX) Fix for their own purposes by collecting up customer orders to be put through around this designated time traditionally chosen as a currency mark for many global commercial contracts. As a home based FX trader, it is clear to me that the reaction of regulators and financial commentators to this shows just how messed up the regulation of the global financial system has become.

On the one hand, fining banks for misconduct and also increasing their capital ratios (the money they need to keep on hand to cover withdrawals, bad loans etc.), while drowning them in essentially 'free' Quantitative Expansion (QE) money and exhortations to lend more on the other, is sheer public policy madness.  It’s contract-expand, get the bastard financiers, hypocrisy of the worst sort. A key question of this event is why, when even the simplest (retail web-based!) FX trading systems will show spikes caused by batched, volume or rigged 4PM trades surrounding the around the FX fix, were these market distortions not spotted earlier?

It seems strange that regulators can track and highlight suspicious insider equity trades down to the nearest 10,000 bucks in real time but neither they nor the bank's compliance teams spotted volume FX trades that nudged the 4PM fix in favour of vested interests.  As a home-based, retail, FX trader myself these were obvious to me on several occasions during the last decade – although the 4PM fix was generally in of itself materially inconsequential to currency gains or loses on my own account. [NB: however, I am pretty sure that some trading stops I put in were blown out by these concentrated FX batched orders.]

In short, there is much more to this sorry episode than meets the eye, at first glance. At the very least regulators should be gunning for criminal INDIVIDUAL participants not weakening key INSTITUTIONS essential to the healthy future of the world's economy. So watch this space.

Outside of Black Swans and extraordinary events such as the Euro currency crisis six summers ago, global, UK politics and business tends to flow across three 'Power Rhythms' in any calendar year. These definable periods have their own 'feel' and focus and successful individuals and companies should plan to implement their strategic and tactical activities to take into account their Rhthymic beats and charcteristics. In this post I highlight what these are.

For example, the months of July and August encapsulate the Recharge Rhythm. In my world, this is the time of year when my clients all want to have urgent meetings before, or early in the Rhythm, since everyone goes away at different times in these months and it is almost impossible to get all key people in the same place all at once. From my experience having worked closely with the Yanks for a few decades, the United States enters the Recharge Rhythm two weeks earlier (mid-June) than the UK because the Brits only start to take their summer holidays seriously after the Wimbledon finals in the first week of July. 

Otherwise, the three Power Rhythms have these characteristics which, if noted and understood, can enhance individual or organisational influence:

1. July/August - Recharge Rhythm
In this Rhythm politicians, investors and company managers wind down, privately lick their wounds and celebrate their successes. Few businesses end their financial year in this period. In politics, this is the period for planning the political year ahead. In the US politicians prepare for November elections as the campaign starts after Labour Day (first Monday in September). In the UK, the Palace of Westminster and European Parliaments recess and people start scheming for different outcomes and eventualities.
 
2. September (after Labour Day) to Jan 2 – Play Ball Rhythm
Competition starts in earnest in this Rhythmic period. In the global commercial retail world the run up to Christmas is all about excellent execution. Nowadays, in both the UK and the US retail sales kick off on Black Friday (Friday after US Thanksgiving) and are unrelenting until the following March. In UK politics, this is a vital period for testing initial political messaging as the only elections that take place are usually internal party related for example at political conferences. The Scottish Independence referendum this year is the exception that proves the rule. Parties can slip up here (but not devastatingly) and still pull it around in the critical…  
 
3. Jan 3 to June 30  – Territorial Rhythm
The most important and longest Rhythm in Europe since here is when power and metaphoric, creative or physical territory is won or lost and the political sands in our democracies shift for better or worse. It is usually the most exhaustive Rhythmic period because even if the public take long breaks at Easter, politicians have to fret and work throughout the global Territorial Rhythm. From the Davos meeting in early January through the election periods in many countries, this is a time where careers and dreams are made or broken.

After a busy couple of days talking geo-strategic economics and political affairs in Switzerland recently, a good friend decided to show me how the world’s Super-Rich and Wealthy 1% live - and die. 

We drove from Geneva into the mountains and lunched at Gstaad where I joined the beautiful people off piste. On the way there we stopped and visited the grave of the great English actor David Niven. On the way back to Geneva we stopped at a tiny place in the countryside where Welsh actor Richard Burton is laid to rest. I remember Burton being a mega rich celebrity movie star in my teens (although I am not sure that the word ‘celebrity’ was used that much back then).  He and his wife/ex-wife/wife/ex-wife, Elizabeth Taylor, dominated the front pages - of both the broad sheets and red-tops.

To find him buried in such a way out of the way place, with such a grubby headstone, really brings home the adage ‘You Can’t Take Your Gold With You’. On my return to the UK, I mentioned to my mother that I had visited the graves of Burton and Niven and she was mightly impressed as a fan of them both. Similarly, I mentioned that I had visited the grave of Richard Burton to my teenage daughter over lunch and she replied nonchallantly: “Who’s That?”. Priceless.

Just about sums it all up really…

I can't say that I have ever taken much notice of an outfit called Saxo Capital Markets before I received an invitation to their event at Bloomberg HQ a few weeks ago. From a marketing perspective this email was intriguing for several reasons:

First the topic was a straightforward question. Is this the end of the Euro as we know it? Right to the point. 'Saxo' sounds European. Surely an institution with Eurozone baggage couldn't bring this degree of clarity about the Euro political project that is, and has, consumed the attention of the EU political and business classes for the past six years.  More investigation revealed that Saxo appear to be Danish in origin which explains a lot ...Read more HERE...    

Return to this page to leave comment.

What's more fascinating about this piece is what it omits rather than what it includes. For example, how did they know this bloke had a 3D printer? Did they see it 'in plain sight' as part of another reason to be in his 'workshop'. I think the Beeb should have told us this. 

On the same day PC Pro magazine reports that 3D-printed "gun parts" are actually spare parts for the printer. Phew, that's all right then 

I have made a note that if I purchase a 3D printer it will be paid for in cash and I will send one of my kids to collect it. Definitely not an item to be delivered from Amazon!

Update Post Friday 10 May 2013 
"Feds Freak Over 3D Gun" says the Drudge Report.  Well I guess we now know that Defense Distributed - the home of the Wiki Weapon Project is not a front for the CIA/FBI/NSA/DHS! The Guardian reports that the site has gone dark at the State Department's Request. 

However the report also says:

"The action came too late to prevent widespread distribution of the files: Defense Distributed told Forbes that the files have already been downloaded more than 100,000 times in the two days since they were uploaded. The largest number of downloads initially were to addresses in Spain, followed by the US, Brazil, Germany and the UK."

If you are one of my readers please remember: Guns Don't Kill People, People Do!

Posted Tuesday 7 May 2013: Yesterday's news that an enterprising group had 'printed' a gun using 3D printing technology is not that surprising to anyone who has been following the development of this revolutionary technology. 

It is not an exaggeration to say that for some of us it has been known for a while that 3D printing is likely to revolutionise manufacturing, have a major positive impact on the environment, create new business models and many new millionaires and potentially change the trading dynamics underpinning globalisation. A recent webcast by Motley Fool is a nice introduction to these themes.

However, when combined with open source data and social media, 3D printing can enable individuals and 'terror cells' with destructive ambitions and access to a PC to cause increased havoc anywhere. 
 
I have posted below about 'ROI terrorism' - where inflicting a high economic price on the target community is the key objective of the 'attack'. Self evidently, an essential element of any return on investment (ROI) is the costs of deploying assets to meet a desired objective (i.e. capital expenditure).  The falling retail price of 3D printers available on eBay which can 'print' to a wide variety of materials, means that even modestly educated terrorists can create weapons that can either defeat, or at least frustrate, modern security scanners and preventive measures. 

Of course, as any fan of James Bond will tell you, non-metal guns are not new. But in the past they were the play things of secret agents or mega-rich gangsters whose contacts include specialised gun makers. Now, the blueprints for the 3D pistol in the news are to be found as open source data on the website of "Defense Distributed - the home of the Wiki Weapon Project. A nonprofit effort to create freely available plans for 3D printable guns." With the social media exposure that this has had over the past 24 hours, I'm sure the word is out.

While perhaps a laudable example of Americans promoting their 2nd Amendment rights and entrepreneurial zeal, it is likely that such activity will also spur less benevolent 'entrepreneurial' activity.  By masking the location from which they download such plans ("Defense Distributed" may well be a front for the CIA/FBI/NSA/DHS for alI I know - if only I had confidence that they were so smart!) any potential terrorist is on their way to making a plastic weapon with the same lethality of any metal single shot pistol. 

As you can see in the photo it seems that only two pieces of the 'printed' pistol are made of easily detected metal, a small (firing?) pin of some kind and the bullet and casing. Individually, these components are not easily identifiable to prevent them from being smuggled separately and put together later. Printing some sort of ammunition in a material other than metal may not be too difficult either when you see what is already being produced in materials ranging from ceramic to concrete. 

So, even if we accept that this current model is only a simple single shot weapon, the die is cast. We are on our way to the sophisticated manufacture of home made weapons which may, in just a short time, replace the Improvised Explosive Device (IED) as a terrorist weapon of choice. Alternatively, the combination of 3D printing, open source data and social media may make the creation of IEDs even harder for the security services to detect by leading to an 'arms race' between innovative 3D printing weapons production and the security measures intended to combat their successful deployment.  Banning backpacks at major events may already be a losing strategy to keep people safe when everyday smaller objects can be molded into weapons which are much more destructive. Anybody tried 3D printing in Semtex?

Updated Post Monday 5 May 2014:  No sign of David Cameron's 'Nutters' at UKIP's final, big, old style, public meeting in St Ives, Cambridgeshire, last Friday  evening. Just a packed, standing room only crowd listening to Nigel Farage... 

However, as a result of this meeting, UKIP got it's Fruitcake! Read here...

Updated Post Monday 4 November 2013 1132hrs:
Finally got off my butt and decided how to vote in next year's Euro Elections.  The catalyst was yesterday's announcement in the Sunday Times by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI) that it would oppose any UK withdrawal from the EU and I have decided to break a habit of a Conservative Party lifetime and vote UKIP at next year's Euro elections.

Best part of this decision so far: It seems to have got my daughter, who is taking a Government and Politics A-Level, to ask a really intelligent question about it (if only on Twitter)!  Awesome stuff...helping to restore my faith in the next generation of sleep-until-Noon, head in an iPhone, continually texting, "Whatever Ya!" sloppy thinkers! Here's yesterday's Twitter thread.

Of course, voting is not enough in this bun fight. Between now and the Euro Elections next May I will help my local UKIP party as much as I can with the aim of maximising their vote in this closed-list proportional representation contest because I believe:

a) As a top 15 global economy the UK can negotiate its own win-win bi-lateral trade agreements with other states or trading blocs like the EU (I say top 15 and not top 5 or 10 as we increasingly seem to be slipping in global economic rankings, not least because of some of the regulations coming out from the EU);

b) We have our own respected world currency which allows us to create an economic environment that makes use of our four biggest natural resources: i) the drive and intelligence of the people who live in Britain (whether born here or who emigrate here); ii) Our time zone which gives us a natural advantage in dealing with all parts of the world; iii) London, quite simply the most cosmopolitan, business orientated city in the world; and iv) the rule of English common law and the international advantage it gives the UK as it relates to company formation and commercial contracts;

c) That any coherent policy supporting the rights of nation states to govern their own affairs that is opposed by a) Big Unions; b) Big Corporations; c) Big Finance Institutions; and d) the major Lobbying and Advertising Groups that try to massage our thinking must be a good thing for SME's, sole traders and the general population at large!

I'm lacing up me boots....Watch this space!

"Don't Be A Follower, Be a Thinker!"...www.ThinkSURE.com

Updated Post Friday 3 May 2013 1026hrs: 
Royston County Council Election Result 2013 - Con hold
Les Baker (Lab) 732
Karen Harmel (Green) 232
Fiona Hill (Con) 1,508
Mark Hughes (UKIP) 1,210
John Winder (Lib Dem) 157

Mark Hughes emailed the following :
"Herts was always going to be a tough nut to crack, I do however sense a 'I told you so!' moment with Nick Robinson [Chief Political Correspondent BBC] and many others this morning, repeating my observation of a few months ago that this is more than protest vote and is in fact a big 70-year change in UK politics!

"Clearly UKIP are now here to stay and this is now a good time leading up to the Euro Elections, next year. The next shock for the Conservatives is when an opinion poll shows UKIP ahead.  Also, we keep coming second in Parliamentary seats, but are the challenger, North, South, East and West something the Conservatives have not done in 40 years. 

"Winning the next General Election is impossible for the Conservatives. When they eventually accept that they might have to reach out to disaffected supporters it will be too late. The danger for them is the longer they leave it the more the UKIP franchise becomes deep routed.  I believe that is already too late. I am UKIP and so is a third of Royston, this will not change anytime soon."

Posted Monday 1 May 2013: Back in January, I posted a piece on the interesting discussion about UKIP that has gripped the group that I dine with regularly twice a year - see below. I noted that one of the group had recently shocked us all by joining UKIP - the political party that is shaking up the political establishment and changing the face of politics here in the United Kingdom. I revealed that person as Mark Hughes, a man who manages a £100 million investment fund from his company offices in Royston in Hertfordshire - and by my calculation employs at least 8 people locally to boot.

I return to this topic since tomorrow is local election day here in England and Mark is standing as the UKIP County Council candidate in Royston and has found himself being backed by UKIP as taking the number one target seat in Hertfordshire.  Nightly, he sends me updates from his street canvassing for comment (I have some form in this space) and I must say I have been impressed by both his commitment and the intelligence that he has applied to the task at hand. Mark's use of highly targeted eMarketing techniques on Facebook (which let's face it is still in its infancy in this regard) to target young people was an eye opener, even for this like-to-think-he's-seen-it-all 'Digital Strategist'. It looks like Mark and his team are 'political pioneers' in using this social media site in this way for local elections.

It is also interesting, that Mark has not forgotten old media and booked the now familiar local newspaper wrap-around during this last week of the campaign (see photo above). What is disturbing if you are the local incumbent Conservative candidate is that you didn't think of booking this for your own campaign! You have effectively been ambushed by a smart, credible opponent. Let's face it, if you get the basic allowance of £9,588 each year that you are on the council (plus petrol, meal expenses and other allowances for 'special duties') you might have thought that such a politician would save some of that money to shore up their electoral base each time they come up for election every four years!  (Think these expenses are outrageous - so do I!  See here)

Then again, the bewildered local Conservative candidate is in the same Party as pro-Euro Ken Clarke so maybe it's not surprising. This is also the same Party that I have voted for all my life. Within the Party I have been a Young Conservative Chairman (here), Constituency Chairman, a Local Conservative Councillor (here) and also Parliamentary (here) and Mayoral (here) candidates.  And one thing I know for sure in all my years as a Conservative voter and activist, is that Ken Clarke is a complete Clown.  Always has been and always will be. The extent of Ken Clarke being in touch with the average entrepreneur is a pair of dirty Hush Puppies! 

In his most recent outburst last Sunday he branded members and voters of UKIP 'Clowns' and stated that the Party had no 'positive policies'.  Since I had that same day mailed in my vote in the County Council elections I tweeted the following: 

So I ask ole Ken: Is the man standing for UKIP in Royston a clown? How many jobs have you actually created through your own entrepreneurial flair as opposed to political flannel? 

In short, Clarke's contribution would be idiotic from any politician, especially a Cabinet Minister.  Simply by asking Google: "What Does UKIP Stand For?" brings up this. A short policy document bullet-pointing a range of policies that seem very sensible, positive alternatives to New Labour and the Liberals and more and more as an alternative to the Conservative Party. Does anyone know if Ken Clarke actually  knows what Google is, or does? Does he have an Internet connection? Can he see a screen through all that cigar smoke? Does he actually know if he has a Facebook page?

As I grow older, I increasingly recognise the value of the Chinese Proverb "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". Ken Clarke is the enemy of both an independent, free market British economy and of decent political debate even at a 'knock about level'. In fact, he is the enemy of all long standing supporters of the Conservative Party who should now show this particular Clown the door by not selecting him as a Conservative candidate at the next election. He's not A-List he's the Circus List. In this election, his stupid comments have made him UKIP's friend!

But then, by any reasonable yardstick this Conservative Party looks doomed to face defeat again at the next general election not least because it is now so out of touch with its own supporters who are increasingly seeing that UKIP offers a clear alternative if not a winning one.

In the end, just voting for what you believe in rather than what commentators say makes "tactical sense", may just make tactical sense! 

If nothing else, before you vote Conservative tomorrow compare the utterings of Ken Clarke with Nigel Farage's response in this BBC Radio 4 Interview.  It is an interesting comparison. Also, follow the Royston result over the next few days for I will be laughing like a Clown if Mark Hughes is elected and ends up holding a casting vote on which political party should rule Hertfordshire. I bet the Leader of the Conservative Group won't be thanking Ken Clarke in this eventuality!

I recently returned from a conference in London entitled “Iran and the International Community: Policy Considerations for 2013”, to see David Beckham's presser on his move to the PSG football club shown live on BBC, CNN, SKY and Aljazeera. As a news junkie it struck me that even President Obama rarely gets this sort of exposure at the same time on these stations in Europe. 

The Iranian conference was put on by two 'Think Tanks'. The UK based Henry Jackson Society and the US Foundation For Defense of Democracies.  It covered a wide range of Topics including: the present state of Iran's nuclear weapons industry, human rights in Iran, Iranian sponsorship of Jihadist terrorist groups, the state of the Iranian opposition movement, the efficacy of the current international sanctions against Iran and an assessment of potential military and diplomatic policy responses. I was left with a distinctly uneasy feeling as to the way in which the world community, with all its other problems, was facing up to the serious threat that an Islamic Republic that wants to 'wipe Israel off the face of the map' was (by general consensus) only 24-36 months away from obtaining the Bomb.  Make no mistake, with this capability Iran is a threat to global peace and security. In short, this is important. 

On the other hand, I have faith in our democratic political institutions to react accordingly but with one reservation brought about by a comment made by the excellent Douglas Murray, Associate Director, The Henry Jackson Society (see below). He said that the Mullahs who rule Iran have run rings around the 'West' and strung us along in the nuclear negotiations that we have initiated because "they care much more about this than we do." Perhaps if we gave as much attention to the Iranian nuclear weapon issue as we do to what David Beckham is doing for the next five months it might make the world a safer place! (see here for previous my blog piece on Iranian Drones)

I tweeted quite a bit during the conference and decided to put the best of my tweets and those of others in attendance into the slide show below. I have referenced contributions from commentators in the slide show at the bottom of the page and introduce them with some of my own assessment on their performance as speakers  below. The slide show finishes with four policy prescriptions (I guess five if you include the point about David Beckham above) which I think democratic countries should implement straight away. 

List of slide show commentators mentioned above

1. Dr. Michael Broer – Senior Non-Proliferation and Nuclear Arms Control Expert, Politico-Military Affairs and Arms Control Directorate, German Ministry of Defence. 
A pleasant enough fellow who seemed very sound for a German bureaucrat. Ballsy Thinking score: 6/10 
2. Reuel Marc Gerecht – Former Middle East Specialist, Directorate of Operations, CIA and Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
This bloke was hot mustard. He had the Thinking Balls of an elephant and as you go through the slide show above you will note he is mentioned most often of all conference speakers. Gerecht reinforced my belief in the importance of the activities of the Sneaky Beakies (the secret services) in defeating Iran's attempts to nuclearise and also stop it financing terrorist activities. Ballsy Thinking score: 10/10
3. John Hannah – Senior Fellow, Foundation for Defense of Democracies and Former National Security Advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney.
Interesting background and clarity of thought. Though tends to slouch!  Ballsy Thinking score: 7/10
4. Richard Perle – Fellow, American Enterprise Institute. 
Formidable background, direct talker and wears long RED ties - a power dresser!   Ballsy Thinking score: 8/10
5. Professor Matthew Kroenig – Department of Government, Georgetown University and former Council on Foreign Relations International Affairs Fellow in the US Department of Defense.
Yowder! This is the man to watch!  Tom Clancy's Jack Ryan (the Red October version) personified. He even looks like he can jump out of a helicopter into the Atlantic ocean...  You could tell from the body language of the Oldies on stage that they respected  this Dude. Clarity, facts and incisive comment. Gerecht, you need to take this man into the field and toughen him up. He even has his own website (check it out here). Ballsy Thinking score: 10/10
6. Elliott Abrams – Former U.S. Deputy National Security Advisor (Middle East) and Senior Fellow for Middle Eastern Studies, Council on Foreign Relations.
An intelligent expert  who seems to know his way around the Beltway. Ballsy Thinking score: 7/10 
7. Rafael Bardaji - Special Adviser, Spanish Ministry of Defence.
A complete sleeper. Er, I mean I was about to drop off when he spoke as his microphone wasn't working 100% and then..he dropped the bombshell remark of the the conference for me about a meeting he had with the Supreme Leader in Iran (see slide 2 above).  I was so startled that I had to ask the nice lady from Reporters Without Borders next to me whether I had heard him right.  Interestingly his remark was my most retweeted from the conference. Ballsy Thinking score: 9/10
8. Mark Dubowitz, Executive Director, Foundation for Defense of Democracies
Oh dear, what a pompous prat! He got his oar into every aspect of the conference. He was on a panel (forgettable), asked ass-kissing questions from the floor and chaired one session appallingly. So obviously out of his depth. I guess if you pay for the damn conference you can do what you like but...   Ballsy Thinking score: 2/10
9. Douglas Murray – Associate Director, The Henry Jackson Society. 
Oh Douglas, you made me proud to be British! Your analysis was simply brilliant.  In fact, you held the floor with every remark you made, most of which was picked up by others on your panel. I Googled you and you even seem to have a fan in Newsnight's executioner Paxman (here). Ballsy Thinking score: 10/10

Update 18Aug2014: Well it now looks as though the government is finally catching on to the problems relating to the legislation in this area which has left UK Companies House with no investigatory power in these matters and having to accept all registrations in good faith without verification as long as they are completed correctly. What is also interesting about the government’s plans for an ‘integrity registry’ which “will crack down on rogue directors” is the global coverage that
it has received. One of the most concise news stories is found in the Daily
Times in Pakistan here. I wonder why this is?  

Posted 17Jan2013
The Economist Intelligence Unit reports that draft legislation presented to the Panel on Financial Affairs of the Legislative Council (Legco, Hong Kong's parliament) on January 7th threatens to withhold information identifying company directors (see here). This is at a time when democracy protesters in Hong Kong  are calling for the Beijing-backed leader of the Special Administrative Region (and the man initiating the legislation) to resign (here). An interesting aspect of these demonstrations is the presence of the Hong Kong Colonial Flag (see photo left) that used to fly over Government House when the UK ruled the territory up until 1997. There is much discussion in Hong Kong about what the flag symbolises today (here) but the flag is clearly associated with the British institutions that used to run the territory. Even though the colonial form of administration was not 'democratic' as we would define it in terms of representative democracy, British rule was generally seen as being pretty efficient, reasonably transparent with low level corruption. Since 1997, Hong Kong has prospered greatly partly because of the strength of the rule of law - particularly in relation to commercial transactions - that Britain left behind. 

Unfortunately however, Hong Kong democracy activists opposing the draft legislation presented to the Panel on Financial Affairs would find it more difficult today to use UK Companies House as an example of how a world class institution should deal with information identifying company directors  (see here my take on why Companies House is world class). Since the 1997 Hong Kong handover, the transparency of the public records held at Companies House has taken a step backwards.

For example, the Companies Act 2006 makes the activities of UK company directors less transparent. It makes the open source, public record, information available from Companies House less useful to those checking to see who controls limited liability companies.  It devalues Companies House both as the registrar of UK companies and also as a world class example to those who oppose restricted transparency draft legislation such as that proposed in Hong Kong. 

The UK Companies Act now allows UK company directors to use a 'Service Address', keeping their residential address private. So now not only do directors get the benefits of trading with limited liability but also get to hide behind a 'service address'. Consequently, instead of the general public being able to find out where a director behind a company really lives, only credit reference agencies and "specified public bodies for carrying out their public functions" get to apply to see this information.

This may sound reasonable but one of the main reasons why people decide to form a limited company is the benefit of having limited liability. This means that directors' personal property is legally separate from the company's assets, as the company is a separate legal entity. In the event that the company was unable to pay its debts, directors' personal property would not usually be at risk. When operating as a sole trader however, individuals have unlimited liability and risk losing personal assets, such as homes, cars and other property if things go wrong. There have long been discussions about whether this form of limited liability protection encourages people to take undue risks without the corresponding levels of responsibility. But overall, the limited liability company, is arguably one of the greatest innovations (along with property rights) driving different forms of the 'free market' system that generates global human prosperity.

Unfortunately, as a reaction to the animal rights activists who harassed directors of UK companies carrying out scientific research in the mid-noughties, the legislation on director service addresses is a retrograde step - a protection too far for those also benefiting from the protection of limited liability. Directors under this sort of hate-fueled scrutiny could already seek a confidentiality order that their address should not be available for public inspection. Quite rightly, such a confidentiality order would only be given in limited circumstances. The director or secretary would have to satisfy the Secretary of State that the public availability of their address was likely to create a serious risk that they, or a person(s) who lived with them, would be subjected to violence or intimidation. This is entirely reasonable.

Now the same companies marketing service registered office addresses for companies are offering the same service for ALL directors addresses... this means that the only public addresses potential suppliers and customers may see when checking out a company maybe the same address for everything associated with the company. In fact, as a result of these changes, it is possible that EVERY company and EVERY director in the UK could end up being registered at the same service address! 

An edition of the BBC's radio programme 'You and Yours' highlighted the problem of company service addresses, where several companies using 145-157 St John Street, London as a registered office address were found to be 'Boiler Room' frauds. This is the home of a 'serviced address' company called Companies Made Simple that is now actively encouraging UK directors to use (for a fee of course) the St. John Street address as their own for the purposes of their directorships. Ludicrous!

In response to this, I may have once suggested that if you don't like these changes in the UK you can always take your business to free market Hong Kong - but it looks like this bad practice is spreading! 

Am I Talking Balls (See the TOB Rule 6)? If so, Talk some Balls (see the TOB Rule. 5) of your own by clicking on the comments tab below.

Wed, 16 Jan 2013. It's amazing to me how we judge events of the past by the standards of our own time. Of course, some events, for example the Holocaust, should be judged the same no matter from which historic point you view it. But what about the cultural mores of office life at a point in time with respect to Sexism? Chauvinism? Discrimination?  How different are these things judged even in our lifetimes?

Two events have caused me to write about this.  First, the scenes shown in some old photos that I found recently in the basement of my last days in a 1980s office environment before joining the army. The prints were going moldy and I just about saved them through digitisation. They portray scenes of rude gestures and nudity so please don't click on the link above if you are easily offended. Second, and I never thought I would ever write these words in a million years: the points raised in a recent article in the Daily Mail (yes I read everything!) by TV presenter Esther Rantzen  ("Esther blasts Savile police squad over its star arrests: Focus on famous could jeopardise young victims seeking justice, says ChildLine founder").  

Now Esther Rantzen is a woman who I know most as wanting to be the MP for Luton of all places! (If you understand that I am from Watford and comprehend the rivalry between Watford and Luton - you'll get a feeling of my opinion of her!).  In any case, Esther's Daily Mail article, criticises the UK Metropolitan police task force's Operation Yewtree, which was set up to examine claims of widespread child abuse in the wake of the Jimmy Savile revelations, yet has now started to arrest celebrities for ‘historic’ allegations of sexual abuse brought by women who were in their twenties at the time.

I know nothing of these allegations other than what has been made public and make no judgment whatsoever on the merit of them. However, is it now time for the hardworking detectives of Operation Yewtree to revisit the culture of the workplace in the 1970s and 80s and put things into context of that time? For them to experience a kind of "Life on a Work Place Mars". What they may find is that the type of things that were thought 'funny' then may not be thought so funny now. In fact, what happened in offices just a few years ago may get you arrested today! 

A slideshow of a particular workplace experience of mine when I was a consultant with Arthur Andersen (now known as Accenture - see The TOB Rule 8 for more on this) which took place in the office of one of Britain's biggest companies in the 1980s might just be the sort of Martian experience that they need. So officers, click on this link here to visit another planet...and, please remember, you have been warned!

For many years, I have been attending two dinners annually with a group of men who I have known and greatly respected most of my adult life. We started politicking together in the early days of Mrs T (see our 'busy frisson’ here) when the fight was on for the soul of the Conservative Party between the 'statists' of Edward Health and the 'free marketers' of Keith Joseph.  We put ourselves forward as candidates for posts in the Young Conservative movement and some of us went onto serve on councils and stand for the UK parliament (See the TOB Rule 5) later in life. 

These dinners have always been events to look forward to. It is a time when we leave our wives/partners elsewhere and have a good chin-wag about the state of the world and how, if we were in charge, we would make the world a better place (and believe me the group has all the quality skills and experience required for running a modern country and/or global company).  My favourite one of the two dinners is held later in the autumn when we get a good deal at a country house hotel and stay Friday overnight (the spring dinner is usually a simple upmarket London affair).  The conversation and debate continue into breakfast the next day and we are normally joined by those attendees who have moved overseas or have to travel long distances, which makes the whole event a more compelling 'catch up' (want to know what it's like to live an expat life in Mauritius - I now know!). At some recent dinners we have even had some interesting foreign guests join us to broaden our outlook still further (it's amazing how language barriers fade away after a few bottles of wine!).

As we start 2013, things are not all well however. The state of the country and the Conservative Party under the leadership of David Cameron and George Osborne is stressing relationships among my dinner companions.  At the last dinner, the arguments of The United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) were put under the microscope both during dinner and afterwards. One attendee for example, had researched the UKIP policies on small business, which I like many others at the table found to be surprisingly appealing and well thought through.  Unfortunately, to others all such discussion about a rival party to the Tories was 'treachery'.  Round robin emails (BTW Guys, I hate this form of communication) during the first week of December exchanging points and counter-points on the intricacies of the UKIP platform made things worse and my friends seemed to exhibit passions that I had not seen in them for quite some time!  

Then on 10 December came the bombshell that one of our number had 'defected' to UKIP. "Mark Hughes a former leader of North Hertfordshire District Council, who was Mayor of Royston in 1990/91, has joined UKIP..." read the web posting of a local paper (see Former Tory town mayor joins UKIP) and my dinner companions were off and running again with those damn emails!  

Now, I know Mark as one of the most successful Independent Financial Advisers in the UK and someone whose economic and financial expertise should be incorporated into Treasury thinking (is there still such a thing?). I also know that he is not a man to do things without all due consideration and whilst not a shock to me, I understand that this was a big step for him. As well as his previous role in the local Conservative Party, Mark has also stood twice for the Party in parliamentary elections.  Such commitment takes time and money so this was not the action of someone who is merely 'playing' politics. I will leave you to follow Mark on Twitter to hear of his most recent views on UKIP (follow Mark here on Twitter) but if people like Mark (monied, knowledgeable, energetic and passionate) are leaving the Conservative party, then they have much to worry about. So far, all the Prime Minister seems to be doing is insulting his potential UKIP supporters (here). Causing me even more disappointment is the once 'sound' Chairman of the Party, Grant Shapps, who seems to have backed himself and the Party into a corner on this issue (here).

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out both for my dinner friends and the Conservative Party as we run into the 2015 election. At present I am sticking with my local Conservative member of parliament (Richard Harrington MP) as in all my years in politics I have never known a better constituency MP who seems to broadly support a centre right, free market, agenda.  But there are some big issues coming up before the election which he must be on the right side of to continue to receive my vote in this 3-way marginal seat (a clear cut referendum on Europe being one of them!).  So even if no one else is, I will be watching this space!

The next dinner is scheduled for late April. If Ballsy Thinking (and compromise!) has ever been required, I fear it will be at this event. A subsequent blog piece will record generic developments for prosperity. 

Are you thinking of switching, or have you switched, to UKIP from the Conservative Party?  What advice can you give me for helping to get all my dinner companions back around the table (and, sorry since we are not in the officers mess NOT talking politics is NOT an option!)? Click on the comments link below and start typing...