Branson wasn't trying to pay "lots of good money" for Concorde, he massively undervalued them and their support facilities because he never wanted to operate them, it was all a PR stunt against British Airways. If British Airways had sold the Concorde and the supporting infrastructure to Branson, and the type certificate had not been withdrawn by Airbus, there would have been no more than a years worth of flights by Virgin Atlantic and then they would have been retired yet again, only this time Virgin Atlantic have some nice, cheap hangar space at Heathrow and New York that they would have otherwise had to pay through the nose for.
No, it really couldn't have - the Virgin Atlantic offering, like many of Bransons stunts, was nothing more than a PR exercise. He even used some of the typical bullshit myths surrounding the Concorde in order to put BA in a bad light - "you were given them for £1 each, so heres £7 give us seven Concordes and we will call it evens..." etc (BA didn't get them for a quid each, they paid real money for the core fleet which they ordered, and took on several unsold airframes at a slightly reduced price but still real money). Virgin also wanted all of the support infrastructure at Heathrow and elsewhere for a song as well - all of that was worth more than the Concorde airframes.
Virgin Atlantic and Branson were also ignoring the fact that the responsible manufacturer (Airbus) had withdrawn the type certificate and support for the aircraft, so there was absolutely no way VA were going to fly them except under an experimental certificate, which forbids passengers.
At the time of the SST battle between the three (US, Europe and USSR), Boeing was most certainly subsonic only - all of their successful supersonic aircraft products come from the merger with McDonnell Douglas, not original Boeing in-house.
They really did bumble with the 2707 - first a design with swing wings, which were all the rage then, but massively heavy, and then switching to progressively simpler designs until they end up with something looking very similar to the other two offerings...
There is no right of reply or requirement for any journalistic body in the US to print any opposing view point for anything, so why is this newsworthy?
Oh for fucks sake, Slashdot really has become another shitty conspiracy theory site:/ I've seen some shit on here thats worse than what you can find on AboveTopSecret.com!
They do, but you aren't their paying customer, the entity which buys the distribution license in your country is their paying customer. If you can access an American service to view the content, why would anyone other than an American business buy the distribution license?
So just what should a business be on the hook for when a third party decides to criminally disrupt their legal right to do business, in such a way that is very hard to mitigate due to the sheer low level aspect of the disruption?
I'm probably not following the group think here, but I don't think Sony should *have* to offer anything - get the "hackers" to refund you your lost subscription time if you really want someone to pay, they were the news responsible for you not being able to use the service.
"For all the vendor can tell" - patently not true, as the vendor won't rely solely on customer supplied information. Don't expect to be able to purchase anything with a payment method which doesn't corroborate location information supplied by the customer - this is not done on the honour system - so bitcoin et al are out.
Regarding sales to entities outside the EU, this is already covered by EU rules and VAT isn't charged for those sales - if, that is, the purchasers payment method details corroborate the extra-EU claim....
None of this is new, its all based on EU tax rules which have been in force in some manner for some time.
Its quite simple - if the vendor cannot reliably detect a VAT rate for you, they will use the fallback VAT rate of 15% for standard rate, or 5% for the reduced rate, which are the EU minimums for those rates.
Nuff said really:)
You can check out all the EUs member VAT rates here:
I dropped O'reilly's Safari Online book service when they started charging me UK VAT rates on my monthly subscription:/ Made it just slightly too expensive so I cut it out completely.
Short of setting an EU VAT rate there's not much else the EU could do. Let one country undercut others on VAT and you'll get big players like Amazon/Tesco setting up firms with 'headquarters' there to pay the lowest rate.
It would only apply to distance sales tho, so Tesco et al couldn't sell goods at the lower VAT rate in UK stores, just online.
Remember Play.com? How originally it was cheap cheap cheap DVDs from the Channel Islands where taxes were lower and thus items were cheaper? Remember how that got "fixed" pretty quickly? Same shit.
Some of those weapons were still being held in a major Iraqi military base overrun by ISIS.
I hope that helps.
No it doesn't, because 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs and 2,400 nerve agent rockets were well below the quantity claimed by Bush and Blair by a couple of orders of magnitude.
And there were significant numbers of sites in Iraq which were known about, inspected and sealed by the UN inspectors prior to the invasion.
Troops were told to keep quiet about finds because those finds were part of a monumental fuck up by the coalition forces in that they were originally UN sealed sites which had been left unattended for months after the invasion - better to keep quiet about the stuff that should be there but wasn't because you failed to secure the site, than to claim it as a "find" when everyone knew about it before anyway.
I can't seem to find it now, but a few years ago there was a story here on Slashdot about a warehouse that had been found underneath either the Brooklyn Bridge or the Golden Gate Bridge (or another well known American bridge) which had been closed in the 1940s and left completely untouched, with boxes of stuff still in there. Quite a time capsule apparently.
Can't sites change use in your world? At one point it might indeed gave been "Magic the Gathering Online Exchange", but it doesn't always have to stay that.
While I lived at RAF Gatow, Berlin (dad was in the RAF) during the 1980s, we used to play a heck of a lot in the extensive woods on base - we even played in and around the fairly large bunker on the edge of the airfield. Until, that is, someone discovered a second entrance to the bunker, and a second level - full of aircraft engines, parts, and about 200 tonnes of WW2 era high explosive in the form of rockets, bombs and other stuff. There were two chambers each about the size of a basket ball court.
In the four years we were there, they discovered previously unknown cellars in three major buildings on base (including the Havel School), and a two mile long tunnel linking the airfield with the Havel river.
All of this on an RAF airbase which covered only a few square miles, and had been active in allied hands since the end of WW2.
There is plenty yet to be discovered in ex-Nazi occupied land, mark my words.
Slashdot Mirror
Branson wasn't trying to pay "lots of good money" for Concorde, he massively undervalued them and their support facilities because he never wanted to operate them, it was all a PR stunt against British Airways . If British Airways had sold the Concorde and the supporting infrastructure to Branson, and the type certificate had not been withdrawn by Airbus, there would have been no more than a years worth of flights by Virgin Atlantic and then they would have been retired yet again, only this time Virgin Atlantic have some nice, cheap hangar space at Heathrow and New York that they would have otherwise had to pay through the nose for.
That was what Branson ultimately wanted.
No, it really couldn't have - the Virgin Atlantic offering, like many of Bransons stunts, was nothing more than a PR exercise. He even used some of the typical bullshit myths surrounding the Concorde in order to put BA in a bad light - "you were given them for £1 each, so heres £7 give us seven Concordes and we will call it evens..." etc (BA didn't get them for a quid each, they paid real money for the core fleet which they ordered, and took on several unsold airframes at a slightly reduced price but still real money). Virgin also wanted all of the support infrastructure at Heathrow and elsewhere for a song as well - all of that was worth more than the Concorde airframes.
Virgin Atlantic and Branson were also ignoring the fact that the responsible manufacturer (Airbus) had withdrawn the type certificate and support for the aircraft, so there was absolutely no way VA were going to fly them except under an experimental certificate, which forbids passengers.
At the time of the SST battle between the three (US, Europe and USSR), Boeing was most certainly subsonic only - all of their successful supersonic aircraft products come from the merger with McDonnell Douglas, not original Boeing in-house.
They really did bumble with the 2707 - first a design with swing wings, which were all the rage then, but massively heavy, and then switching to progressively simpler designs until they end up with something looking very similar to the other two offerings...
Or just replace it with something better...
Wasn't Aperture 2 a complete rewrite as the codebase for Aperture 1 was so horrific?
There is no right of reply or requirement for any journalistic body in the US to print any opposing view point for anything, so why is this newsworthy?
Oh for fucks sake, Slashdot really has become another shitty conspiracy theory site :/ I've seen some shit on here thats worse than what you can find on AboveTopSecret.com!
Backups arent counted in the quota.
And when the global license prices adjust to compensate?
They do, but you aren't their paying customer, the entity which buys the distribution license in your country is their paying customer. If you can access an American service to view the content, why would anyone other than an American business buy the distribution license?
So just what should a business be on the hook for when a third party decides to criminally disrupt their legal right to do business, in such a way that is very hard to mitigate due to the sheer low level aspect of the disruption?
I'm probably not following the group think here, but I don't think Sony should *have* to offer anything - get the "hackers" to refund you your lost subscription time if you really want someone to pay, they were the news responsible for you not being able to use the service.
You could have been "fooling around" on the Xbox 360 from March 2006 when MS released the XNA toolkit to all and sundry, so what was stopping you?
"For all the vendor can tell" - patently not true, as the vendor won't rely solely on customer supplied information. Don't expect to be able to purchase anything with a payment method which doesn't corroborate location information supplied by the customer - this is not done on the honour system - so bitcoin et al are out.
Regarding sales to entities outside the EU, this is already covered by EU rules and VAT isn't charged for those sales - if, that is, the purchasers payment method details corroborate the extra-EU claim....
None of this is new, its all based on EU tax rules which have been in force in some manner for some time.
Depends on the rate - standard rate must be at least 15% and reduced rate at least 5%. There are other rates.
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_c...
Its quite simple - if the vendor cannot reliably detect a VAT rate for you, they will use the fallback VAT rate of 15% for standard rate, or 5% for the reduced rate, which are the EU minimums for those rates.
Nuff said really :)
You can check out all the EUs member VAT rates here:
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_c...
Oh, I might add, that was 10 or so years ago.
I dropped O'reilly's Safari Online book service when they started charging me UK VAT rates on my monthly subscription :/ Made it just slightly too expensive so I cut it out completely.
Short of setting an EU VAT rate there's not much else the EU could do. Let one country undercut others on VAT and you'll get big players like Amazon/Tesco setting up firms with 'headquarters' there to pay the lowest rate.
It would only apply to distance sales tho, so Tesco et al couldn't sell goods at the lower VAT rate in UK stores, just online.
Remember Play.com? How originally it was cheap cheap cheap DVDs from the Channel Islands where taxes were lower and thus items were cheaper? Remember how that got "fixed" pretty quickly? Same shit.
Depends on what movies you are after, surely?
I enjoyed the final Hobbit film, but aside from that both the Alan Turing and the Stephen Hawking films were ones I would recommend to friends.
Perhaps you need to address that rather than putting your leaders on a pedestal separated from the normal person...
Some of those weapons were still being held in a major Iraqi military base overrun by ISIS.
I hope that helps.
No it doesn't, because 5,000 chemical warheads, shells or aviation bombs and 2,400 nerve agent rockets were well below the quantity claimed by Bush and Blair by a couple of orders of magnitude.
And there were significant numbers of sites in Iraq which were known about, inspected and sealed by the UN inspectors prior to the invasion.
Troops were told to keep quiet about finds because those finds were part of a monumental fuck up by the coalition forces in that they were originally UN sealed sites which had been left unattended for months after the invasion - better to keep quiet about the stuff that should be there but wasn't because you failed to secure the site, than to claim it as a "find" when everyone knew about it before anyway.
I can't seem to find it now, but a few years ago there was a story here on Slashdot about a warehouse that had been found underneath either the Brooklyn Bridge or the Golden Gate Bridge (or another well known American bridge) which had been closed in the 1940s and left completely untouched, with boxes of stuff still in there. Quite a time capsule apparently.
Can't sites change use in your world? At one point it might indeed gave been "Magic the Gathering Online Exchange", but it doesn't always have to stay that.
Every? I don't give a shit, but then I'm not in the US, and never plan to live there...
While I lived at RAF Gatow, Berlin (dad was in the RAF) during the 1980s, we used to play a heck of a lot in the extensive woods on base - we even played in and around the fairly large bunker on the edge of the airfield. Until, that is, someone discovered a second entrance to the bunker, and a second level - full of aircraft engines, parts, and about 200 tonnes of WW2 era high explosive in the form of rockets, bombs and other stuff. There were two chambers each about the size of a basket ball court.
In the four years we were there, they discovered previously unknown cellars in three major buildings on base (including the Havel School), and a two mile long tunnel linking the airfield with the Havel river.
All of this on an RAF airbase which covered only a few square miles, and had been active in allied hands since the end of WW2.
There is plenty yet to be discovered in ex-Nazi occupied land, mark my words.