Talk:Black Wednesday

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Estimated cost

Which treasury concluded that cost was £3.4 billion; the labour or the conservative one? Can there be a bias in whatever govt makes this figure? --82.153.98.248 (talk) 21:18, 25 November 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Eurosceptic Parlance

"...Black Wednesday (or 'White Wednesday' in euro-sceptic parlance)..."

I'm curious, is the term 'white Wednesday' in wide enough use to merit a mention in the opening line of the article? Should it be moved further down the article, if not removed entirely? Jamestplunkett 21:55, 22 November 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Need for update

"Most notably George Soros who earned over $1 billion in doing so. The event is estimated to have cost the people of Britain £4 billion in reserves, spent trying to prop up the pound." This could use some more accurate explanation and data. - Jerryseinfeld 20:44, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"Speculators borrowed pounds and lire and sold them for DM, in the expectation of being able to repay the loan in devalued currency and to pocket the difference." added.

[edit] Conflict with another incident

There was an incedent at Apple Computer that was called Black Wednesday. There is no article on it. I propose that the current Black Wednesday article be preserved and another one Black Wednesday (Apple Computer)

[edit] reputation of the conservatives...

"However, the reputation of the Conservatives for competent handling of the economy was shattered."

was that not already ruined in the 1980s?

Opinion polls consistently rated the Conservatives as more competent to run the economy (it was a major factor in their election victories up to and including 1992) until Black Wednesday.

[edit] Article needs to be separated

This article is about one specific event in British history - surely a separate disambig page is needed? SatuSuro 12:14, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] POV / Original Research

Footnote 1 : This is a matter of some debate. Former Prime Minister Edward Heath referred to this as a "one club golf" policy. Interest rates are a blunt instrument that affects all aspects of the economy equally. They should be supplemented by selective fiscal policies. However, to do so was contrary to the prevailing monetarist views at the time.

If it's a "matter of some debate", is it appropriate for an encyclopedia to use such a prescriptive words as "should" and "hence"? Particularly without sourcing the note? JiHymas@himivest.com 01:04, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The carry trade

The article currently states:

The ensuing devaluation resulted to a major transfer of wealth from the government (whose foreign currency reserves which it had to sell would have gained in value) to the carry traders (who additionally to the interest rate differential between the pound and the DM also gained from the devaluation of their borrowing).

According to the Bundesbank's time series ST0101: Money market rates reported by Frankfurt banks / Overnight money / Daily quotations, overnight rates in Germany never exceeded 9.73. Meanwhile, according to the Bank of England, the Daily sterling overnight interbank average lending rate was never less than 10% [1]. The article implies borrowing was in pounds. As UK interest rates were at all times higher that those in Germany, this would not make a profitable carry trade. Unless a reference or explanation is provided, I will delete this claim. - Crosbiesmith 09:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

I have removed that passage for the time being. - Crosbiesmith 19:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
Sorry for my late answer, I was busy and haven't logged in to Wikipedia for quite a while. It was me who added the carry trade claim, as I heard the story from a professor of mine in that way. I checked the rate histories too, and it seems that the interest rates in Germany were higher neither in nominal nor in real terms (as inflation was higher in Germany at the time as well). So I must admit that I was in error claiming it as a profitable carry trade as well. -- Marcika 14:43, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


[edit] The Article seem to underplay the involvment of George Soros on Black Wednesday.

There needs to be more details of Soros hand in Black Wednesday. Until then the article is incomplete.--Redblossom (talk) 19:05, 12 February 2008 (UTC)