Where to start today then? - it has indeed been a busy week, keeping up with old Grouchy Gordon's mutterings, responding to some of you who think I maybe was a bit over - critical of the UK as compared with France last weekend, reading with amazement about the Bradford & Bingley's latest idiocy, and much more besides!

Starting with the beloved Chancellor, it seems those of us who laughed derisively earlier this year when he announced his 'growth targets' for UK Plc, were a lot closer to the mark than many people thought at the time.
Muttered into his rather strangely - coloured tie the other day was the figure "1.75%" - somewhat divergent then, from his belligerent crowing only a few months ago, of "3.5%". Ah well, maybe arithmetic isn't his strongest subject.

Naturally, Gordon blamed 'rising oil prices' for his halving of the forecast - no question of actually admitting his earlier projection was a downright fabrication. (And I reckon even 1.75% is wide of the mark. 'Nil' might be nearer.)

His other comment worthy of note, was of course the U - turn on SIPPS (Self - Invested Pensions) when he decided that after all, it might actually NOT be such a good idea to allow houses, fine wines etc to be included within the permissible asset classes.
What astonished me at the time, was the fact he was even thinking of permitting such fat cat fripperies in the first place, but I'm pretty sure the motivation was that of a certain desperation to keep the property bubble frothing away - after all, little else is propping up the UK's spending culture, and there's sure as heck not much else left to keep the economy (seemingly) afloat. Certainly not real jobs that actually contribute to a country's wealth - they are disappearing "faster than snow off a stone wall" as they say where I come from. (Actually, what they say is "faister nor sna aff a dyke' but I thought maybe I should provide the translation.)

I think Gordon rather belatedly woke up to the fact that the opportunities for major tax avoidance - indeed evasion - were huge, and his indignant, self righteous persona caused him to close the potential loopholes even though he might be taking a risk with the property bubble finally bursting.

I recall suggesting some time ago in WICS that I didn't really think property SIPPS would have much effect on house prices - now we'll never know.

As for the fine wine, well, I guess one could simply drink it, couldn't one? (I wonder how they were going to define 'fine wine' anyway? 'Not bought from Lidl'?)

What of course is highly amusing is all the wailing and gnashing of teeth from the financial disservices industry - you would think they're all going to go bust because of the U - turn: "£200m wasted, thousands of hours of work, blah blah." Not to mention £millions of commission that won't be earned, trying to stuff wholly inappropriate pension arrangements down the throats of the world and his brother. My heart bleeds for them - maybe they'll just have to go back to selling double glazing. (Sorry - that's maybe a bit insulting to double glazing salespeople.)

The other business sector that's causing me much current amusement is that of estate agents - according to them when property SIPPS were first announced, there would be a huge boost to all sorts of housing investment, especially buy - to - let, and "if you don't get in now, you'll regret it etc etc."
This week, after the scheme had been knocked on the head, what they're saying is "We have always said that SIPPS would have had only a marginal overall effect. Prices will keep rising anyway, so buy now before you regret...blah blah." Wow. I'm so glad all these people are such experts, to keep us mortals on the right track through life.

Anyway, moving on, my old Highland granny (I had two 'old Highland grannies' but this was the really scary one) always used to say I had inherited the 'second sight' from HER granny, and maybe she was right - the other week I mentioned the used car dealer who would 'pay for your Christmas' and then last weekend we spoke about 'remortgaging just in time for Christmas'.
And during this last week, what do we see? Only the Bradford & Bingley, no less, offering a pre Christmas remortgage, complete with cashback to 'pay for Christmas'! A truly responsible lender, then.
The wee fairies at the foot of my garden are rolling around in total hysteria - I can see them from here.

Moving rapidly along before you get the wrong idea about my capacity to hallucinate, it seems the world is a wee bit short of oil, so perhaps encouraging exploration would be a good idea. Presumably that's why Herr Brown plans to slap yet another tax increase on oil companies - after all, we don't want to make it too easy for them, do we?
Strange how he isn't planning to tax banks a bit more.

Finally, before we discuss this weekend's charts, one or two of you emailed me about the piece last weekend comparing France to Britain, to suggest that the infrastructure of the former is better, mainly because the French pay a lot higher taxes.

It's certainly true that their direct taxation (income tax and NHI contributions) add up to a fair bit more than they do in the UK.

However, indirect taxes are a lot lower overall. Petrol is consistently around 10p a litre less than in Britain, with diesel a whopping 25p less.
There is no road tax disc to buy (road fund licence) - granted, you have to pay to travel on many French motorways but only where there is an alternative, no cost route very close by - otherwise they are toll - free.)
I hesitate to tell you what my 'council tax equivalent' costs me, because you simply wouldn't believe how little it is - the low £hundreds, in fact.
Due to a very different tax regime from that of the UK, a perfectly decent bottle of red wine costs about £1.50 and you can pay as little as 30p, although I would strongly advise against so doing - it probably wouldn't have fitted the SIPPS criteria - and a bottle of 'XO' quality Cognac comes in at around £18, with a 3 star for about £4.50. A really good 'keeper' bottle of French red might cost £5 if you know where to look, though in my view, Catalonia provides a far better source. (You can doubtless see that booze and driving are subjects close to my heart, but I promise I don't do both at the same time.)

Anyway, overall I suspect there's very little difference in the 'tax take' between the two nations, and again I point out that France has never had the massive benefit of North Sea oil revenues.

The question posed last weekend regarding the UK, is therefore still very much open: "Where has all the money gone?"

That's today's rant over, you'll be relieved to hear, so onward to the charts.

Last weekend, I said we would have another look at Millennium & Copthorne, this time concentrating on finding a suitable dma pairing to manage a potential trade, and I also promised we would look at what might happen when a triangle formation seems to 'extend sideways' beyond its apex - the chart of Tate & Lyle below, is an excellent example.

But first, we'll look at 'history repeating itself' - one of my workshop themes - and to do so, we'll have a wee look at the chart of William Hill.

That's your lot for this weekend - next Sunday's effort (18th December) will be the final WICS for 2005, by the way. (It may be delayed till Monday 19th because of my other role at this time of year as "Dad's 24 hour airport taxi service".)

The next WICS after 18th December will be on either 8th or 15th January - if there's none on the 8th, then there will certainly be one on the 15th.

Till next weekend, then, Happy Christmas Shopping.
Ian.

PS: Babcock was mentioned in WICS a few weeks ago - have a look at J D Wetherspoon and see if there are similarities between the two charts.
Oh yes, and compare the chart of William Hill, with that of Premier Farnell.

.'IMPORTANT NOTICE: These WICS charts are for EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. They represent only MY understanding of what is happening in the market for any particular share, stock, commodity or index. In NO circumstances should they be construed as recommendations to trade. If I choose to trade what I see, that is MY decision. YOU must, in turn, come to YOUR OWN conclusions about what action, if any, YOU might choose to take'.