And I notice that the central bankers BoE, EU, USA all seem to have gone relatively quiet recently.
Now it could be they have not a clue what will happen, thnk best to keep quiet lest they get blamed and maybe even
decided time to go sking or whatever rocks their boat, before 29 March storm, or they may have been quietlty agreeing
plans to minimise excessive turbulence in the currency markets all without troubling the politicians with the detail..
yes, something along those lines for the Big players
a "do not touch currency", for no risk in influencing the political process, for no blame for disturbing, for no risk in disturbing (so far) a process that can still lead ("in the normal way") to a deal.
Like an armistice.
Not so directly after the referendum (let the market magic balance happen), and the same during the first year of negotiating, but more so an armistice with time left diminishing.
It is interesting. It could be that the City of London has factored in and assumes a no deal UK exit.
My understanding:
The pound to $ was 1,50-1,60 before Cameron got elected. Slowly moved 1,45 before the referendum and dived down sharp to 1,32 directly after the referendum, to stabilise over 6 months to 1,20-1,25.
Most opinions the last couple of months are that a really soft deal would give 1,45, and a no-deal below 1,20 up to between 1,00-1,10 temporarily with a cliff edge.. A simple FTA more like 1,20-1,25.
A transition period deal would give 1,30-1,35 indicating a 50/50 chance between a soft close deal and a simple FTA.
Not to exclude in all this is that the $ is expected to weaken a bit the next years because of Trump's kamikaze approach to trade wars, the wall, and the tax cut deficits stategy. In a continued remain the Pound would have become stronger than 1,50-1,60.
With the Pound currently at around 1,30, these values do not make it imo probable that the City assumes a no-deal.