Indeed. And I think that's four in a row, isn't it?

92 was the last time it was materially wrong, I think. And since then (and in response to that) their methods have got a lot more sophisticated.

Reason I mention it is that there was lots of speculation that this time, different trends in different areas would make it much harder to get right. Impressive that it was pretty much spot on again.

Posted By: Tricky Hawes, May 7, 11:12:38