Reply
Thread Tools
Posts: 1,038 | Thanked: 3,980 times | Joined on Nov 2010 @ USA
#1
I'm in the same boat, being in the US, where Sailfish X isn't officially available. But just now looking at the dropdown list of countries at Jolla.com where SFOS X can be purchased, it doesn't appear the UK is on the list of countries now, either. Wasn't it on the list prior to Brexit, or am I remembering it wrong? I have been wrong before.

Anyway, glad I'm a fan of Irish Opera, that makes up somewhat for the inconvenience.
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to robthebold For This Useful Post:
Posts: 807 | Thanked: 1,589 times | Joined on Aug 2014
#2
Originally Posted by robthebold View Post
Wasn't it on the list prior to Brexit, or am I remembering it wrong?
No you're not wrong. Looks like an Xperia 10ii will be going begging as won't be able to purchase Sailfish X for it (if ever released), but will have all the fuss of CN22 customs declaration just to send to Europe from UK now.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to aspergerguy For This Useful Post:
clort's Avatar
Posts: 106 | Thanked: 313 times | Joined on Mar 2019
#3
It's EU not allowing free trade. Just FYI.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to clort For This Useful Post:
Posts: 177 | Thanked: 427 times | Joined on Sep 2017
#4
Originally Posted by clort View Post
It's EU not allowing free trade. Just FYI.
Didn't we spend years 'negotiating' to ensure free trade was maintained and celebrate finally getting a deal? Politicians
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to suicidal_orange For This Useful Post:
Posts: 207 | Thanked: 552 times | Joined on Jul 2011
#5
Originally Posted by suicidal_orange
Didn't we spend years 'negotiating' to ensure free trade was maintained and celebrate finally getting a deal? Politicians
It took years because of the rigged second referendum conspiracy, i.e. we'll thwart the Brexit vote by pitching a deal we've sabotaged (by legislating to take no deal off the table etc... ) against remain in a "confirmatory vote" and then pretend that's democracy in action.

Here's a video of A C Grayling from the "Peoples Vote" campaign pitching the embryo of the idea to Guy Verhofstadt. Now every day on twitter Grayling bleats and blubs about how terrible the Brexit deal is even though he explicitly begged for a bad one.

The irony is their skulduggery led to a much harder Brexit than there might otherwise have been.



Originally Posted by aspergerguy
but will have all the fuss of CN22 customs declaration just to send to Europe from UK now
As somebody who's written the code for commercial invoices, Intrastat Declarations and EC Sales Lists I can tell you one was no more difficult than the other, it's just grabbing data x and stuffing it in template y. Bread and butter for database programmers and if you're an ISO 9001 company you'll already be collecting the necessary data. Things are sticky at the moment because there was so little time between the deal being done and its required processes going live.



Originally Posted by robthebold
Jolla.com where SFOS X can be purchased
Be warned, I once purchased a tablet from those shysters and I'm still waiting for the second 50% of my refund.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to switch-hitter For This Useful Post:
pichlo's Avatar
Posts: 6,447 | Thanked: 20,981 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#6
Originally Posted by clort View Post
It's EU not allowing free trade. Just FYI.
Can we leave politics out of this, please?

Look at it from an individual business' point of view. International trade has challenges. You have to deal with different rules and regulations, custom checks, tariffs and who knows what else. I would know: unlike you, I grew up in a country where our company had to deal with such things on a daily basis.

So any individual business has to make tough choices: do we trade internationally or not? Is the extra hassle and associated costs (staffing, training, keeping up with regulations in all our export markets...) worth it? Or do we go the easier path and trade just within our own country and forfeit a bigger market?

This is where the idea of a single market comes in. It expands what "within our country" means. It makes it easy to forget that Finland, France, Germany, Slovakia, Romania are different countries. From an individual business' point of view, it makes no difference whether you are buying from or selling to Helsinki, Frankfurt or Milano. That, my friend, is the exact opposite of "not allowing free trade".

The drawback is that it may have worked too well and made things too easy. So easy that some businesses (such as Jolla) are content with the market of 450 million and do not bother with all the hassle of looking beyond. Especially considering that those 450 million cover most of the richer part of the world. (BTW, we see the same in the US, where many US companies do not know how to trade outside the US and where most people do not even know the international dial prefix.)

What is worse, the single market made trading so easy that some people, particularly in the country that has been subject to decades of relentless anti-EU propaganda, forgot that it was the single market that made it easy. They take their luck and privilege for granted and are whinging when they foolishly throw it away and suddenly see the consequences. Like, for example, Brexit voting British fishermen.
__________________
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
 

The Following 14 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post:
Posts: 207 | Thanked: 552 times | Joined on Jul 2011
#7
Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
Look at it from an individual business' point of view. International trade has challenges. You have to deal with different rules and regulations, custom checks, tariffs and who knows what else.
Not particularly significant challenges though. For over 30 years I was a Director of a UK manufacturing company that traded right around the world. Once you've got your business processes setup for a particular locale you're away, none of it was rocket science.



Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
This is where the idea of a single market comes in. It expands what "within our country" means. It makes it easy to forget that Finland, France, Germany, Slovakia, Romania are different countries. From an individual business' point of view, it makes no difference whether you are buying from or selling to Helsinki, Frankfurt or Milano.
You're ignoring processes like Intrastat declarations, ECSL or (heaven forbid) VAT Triangulation.



Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
That, my friend, is the exact opposite of "not allowing free trade".
The EU is a protectionist bloc with a very high tariff barrier at its perimeter (and a tariff schedule that protected German and French industries but weren't well suited to the UK economy), it's hardly a beacon of free trade.



Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
Especially considering that those 450 million cover most of the richer part of the world.
Shush... don't mention Target 2 and that the Bundesbank is actually insolvent.
And then we have the demographics of Europe to consider.



Originally Posted by pichlo View Post
What is worse, the single market made trading so easy that some people, particularly in the country that has been subject to decades of relentless anti-EU propaganda, forgot that it was the single market that made it easy. They take their luck and privilege for granted and are whinging when they foolishly throw it away and suddenly see the consequences. Like, for example, Brexit voting British fishermen.
The UK paid an EU membership fee higher than tariffs for the "luck and privilege" of trading without tariffs.

Furthermore import tariffs are money going in to the UK treasury where they are used to pay for the National Health Service, Education, Social Services, ...

The membership fee is money going out of the UK treasury where it pays for lovely new infrastructure for the UK's competitors plus private jets / free wine cellars / obscenely generous pensions for incompetent EU politicians and bureaucrats, ... Oh, you can't beat that warm fuzzy feeling you get from subsidizing your competitors.

Given a choice between the two above I know which I'd rather fund.
 

The Following User Says Thank You to switch-hitter For This Useful Post:
pichlo's Avatar
Posts: 6,447 | Thanked: 20,981 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#8
Originally Posted by switch-hitter View Post
Not particularly significant challenges though.
That depends. Oranges are oranges. There is probably not much difference in regulations between different countries. Though, being an agricultural product, I am not even sure about that. Medicines and other chemicals, meat and dairy products, electrical goods, non-material goods such as services, information and software may be more difficult.

Note that I said "may be", not "are". You may say they are not and you may well be right. But how do you know? How can you be sure? The situation may change at any moment as countries change their regulations, as the UK has repeatedly indicated it wants to do in diverging from EU rules. You need someone whose job it is to constantly monitor the situation in all your export markets. In other words, additional costs to your business.

But, most importantly, as I have pointed out several times in this forum, there is a bigger difference between "nothing" and "a little" than there is between "a little" and "a lot". A million is only a million times bigger than 1, but 1 is an infinity times bigger than zero. For a business that has evolved in an environment where they have never had to deal with such challenges, a change from "nothing" to "something" is a HUGE change. A qualitative change, if you will. A completely new way of thinking. The British fishermen being "caught by surprise" (despite being warned many times but dismissing all warnings as "project fear") are an excellent example. In comparison, a change from "something" to "something more" is merely a quantitative change.

<political, feel free to ignore>
The EU is a protectionist bloc with a very high tariff barrier at its perimeter (and a tariff schedule that protected German and French industries but weren't well suited to the UK economy), it's hardly a beacon of free trade.
It is striking how the British tabloid propaganda machine has permeated regular folks' thinking. Just use words like "protectionist" as pejorative, without giving any explanation or context, or claim it helps "the others" but not "us", again without providing any proof, and they will parrot it without thinking. Then you can manipulate them into doing anything, including acting against their own interests. All you need to do is conjure an external enemy and foster the "us and them" mentality.

Of course the EU is protectionist. No one has ever said otherwise. Every market protects itself. What the Single Market has achieved is absolutely remarkable: it replaced 28 (now 27) individual protectionist markets with one. It did not erect any new barriers, but it removed barriers among the members. A model so successful it has been replicated many times around the world. A model the UK had benefited from HUGELY, rising from "the sick man of Europe" to the 5th richest country in the world. (Note that we have dropped down that rank after the Brexit vote. Depending on what measure you apply, we are now between 7th and 11th.)

The UK paid an EU membership fee higher than tariffs for the "luck and privilege" of trading without tariffs.
I have yet to see a country that imposes less than 0.4% import tariffs. Because that's how much our EU membership had cost us. Even if such a hypothetical utopian country existed, there are non-tariff barriers. As "a Director of a UK manufacturing company that traded right around the world", I am sure you are fully aware of that.

Furthermore import tariffs are money going in to the UK treasury where they are used to pay for the National Health Service, Education, Social Services, ...
Another popular British tabloid trope. Yes, it is money going to the treasury. But where from? The nasty foreigners? No, it is money paid to the country's treasury by... its own citizens!

Tariffs are not a source of income. It is not money flowing into the country. It is money flowing from the citizens to the government. You are right, a left-wing, centrist or a moderate-right government would spend it on public services. Not our current cohort we've had in power for over a decade, who have an ideological aversion to public services and who, as we have seen especially in the past year, have no qualms about shovelling billions of public money to private hands, with nothing or very little to show for it.

As you say, given a choice between the two above I know which I'd rather fund.

</political>
__________________
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
 

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post:
pichlo's Avatar
Posts: 6,447 | Thanked: 20,981 times | Joined on Sep 2012 @ UK
#9
Please note again that I do not want to turn this into another political discussion, beyond what is absolutely necessary to explain the thread topic: that Jolla has removed the UK from the list of supported countries.

I have tried to explain what a membership of the Single Market means to an individual business such as Jolla and what consequences the choice of a country to leave the Single Market might have. All of it was 100% predictable (and predicted, if you listened to the experts rather than snake oil salesmen). The only people acting surprised are those who never stopped to think about it.
__________________
Русский военный корабль, иди нахуй!
 

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to pichlo For This Useful Post:
Posts: 207 | Thanked: 552 times | Joined on Jul 2011
#10
Originally Posted by pichlo
Oranges are oranges.
And oranges are a fine example of how the EU's tariff schedule was not appropriate for the UK, why would the UK want a 16% tariff on oranges?



Originally Posted by pichlo
Of course the EU is protectionist.
Cool, I'm glad you've accepted that point. Not all Brexit voters are free marketeers, many share your protectionist viewpoint and want to protect the UK market from the EU to redress the massive trade deficit.



Originally Posted by pichlo
It did not erect any new barriers,
UK joining the EEC (as it was then) erected a trade barrier between UK and its greatest allies - Australia, Canada and New Zealand putting a trade barrier between them and their biggest export market (at the time).



Originally Posted by pichlo
A model so successful it has been replicated many times around the world.
It hasn't been replicated anywhere. In fact the repeated claim it's the "biggest single market in the world" is a play on that, designed to mislead without being a direct lie. It's certainly not the biggest trade bloc in the world.

Now the UK has left the EU should it join CPTPP, as HMG has suggested it would like to do, CPTPP will be larger than the EU's single market however CPTPP will still not be a "single market".



Originally Posted by pichlo
A model the UK had benefited from HUGELY, rising from "the sick man of Europe" to the 5th richest country in the world.
Initially when UK joined things got worse not better. The marked improvement in the UK's economy was really due to Thatcher's reforms in the eighties.



Originally Posted by pichlo
(Note that we have dropped down that rank after the Brexit vote. Depending on what measure you apply, we are now between 7th and 11th.)
The world won't stand still, within the next decade swathes of the car industry (so important to Germany) will be wiped out by TaaS and London's Financial Services could suffer a similar fate from DeFi. Don't imagine desperately clinging to the Status Quo makes you safe. Sometimes you need to temporarily go backwards in order to change to a better course for the future.



Originally Posted by pichlo
Yes, it is money going to the treasury. But where from?
As I stated above the UK has a massive trade deficit with the EU, torrents of money flooding out, only a trickle coming back. If you look at the UK's trade balance with the RoW it's clear we're not adding value and selling it on either. So where's that money coming from?



Originally Posted by pichlo
I have tried to explain what a membership of the Single Market means to an individual business such as Jolla and what consequences the choice of a country to leave the Single Market might have.
From Jolla's wiki:
On 25 July 2014 Jolla opened the first Jolla store in Kazakhstan in association with Mobile Invest.
On 12 August 2014 Jolla was launched in Hong Kong in a partnership with 3 Hong Kong.
In September 2014, Jolla launched in India on e-retailer Snapdeal.
In November 2014, Jolla launched in Russia.

As I understand it the only place Jolla has gained any traction is with the Russian government who don't want an American OS.

Jolla would enthusiastically embrace any market that would pay them some attention.
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to switch-hitter For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
availability, sailfish x

Thread Tools

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 22:47.