Paul the sparky wrote:

We did a sweepstakes at work, but I don't know who I've got as they're not opening the envelopes until the semis. I've never heard of a sweepstakes being organised like this, fair enough if you keep the teams secret until everyone has a team, but this is just bonkers. Who do I support?

adored wrote:

Facewon wrote:

Brazil’s World Cup Is An Expensive, Exploitative Nightmare

In the end, there is always the financial aspect of the biggest show on earth. Goldman Sachs strategist Peter Oppenheimer said the company’s analysts have found that, according to past history, the winning country’s equity markets outperform global stocks by 3.5 percent on average in the first month after winning, “although the outperformance fades significantly after three months.” 

Brazil will beat Argentina 3-1 in the final after they see off Germany and Spain in their respective semifinals, Goldman analysts including Jan Hatzius and Sven Jari Stehn said in a report. The host nation has a 48.5 percent probability of winning the FIFA tournament, followed by Argentina at 14.1 percent and Germany at 11.4 percent.

These are bankers, not bookies.

A report like this can lead the mind to extreme cynicism about how and why games are determined.

* *

My money on Brazil, as per. . .Goldman Sachs?!

adored wrote:

M0stly harm13ss wrote:

I read the Goldman Sachs World Cup predictions document the other day, which made for an interesting couple of hours. Worth a look..as long as you don't expect them to talk up Engerland (54% chance of getting out of the group, 1% chance of winning). Semi predictions from them are Brazil, Argentina, Germany, Spain. (Brazil beat Argentina in the final). I was actually considering going to stick a few quid on their predictions from the group stages onwards.

Economists' attempts to forecast the outcome of the World Cup are a harmless exercise in seeking publicity. All the same, consultancy firm PwC, limbering up for Brazil, could have found space in its 10-page analysis to tell us how its "PwC World Cup Index" performed at launch four years ago at South Africa 2010. Short answer: lamentably. "The favourite must be Brazil," opined PwC then, as now. The South Americans lost their quarter-final. "Germany, Italy and Argentina are also strong contenders," said the number-crunchers in 2010, hedging their bets and attempting to cover many bases. None of that trio reached the final. Italy even managed to finish bottom of a group that included New Zealand. "Cameroon and Nigeria also have the potential to do relatively well in 2010," continued PwC. Both finished bottom of their groups, with Cameroon losing all its games. PwC's 2010 study in econometrics also came up with this shocker: "England remain a good bet for reaching the quarter-finals." No, that was a very unsafe bet: the model did not foresee the horror of Bloemfontein and the 4-1 defeat at the hands of Germany in the last 16. As for eventual winners Spain, PwC struck a sceptical note. "Spain has been a historic underperformer (notably when playing at home in 1982) that needs to do better this time to justify its second place in the current Fifa world rankings." Losing finalists Holland didn't even get a mention among PwC's list of potential outperformers. "It is difficult to produce reliable forecasts of the outcomes of the 2014 World Cup based on econometrics alone," concludes PwC this time. Yes, you demonstrated that last time.