The idiom "handmaid's tale" has a meaning that predates the novel & the film & TV series (etc.). A web search results in a plethora of results for those, but I can't find anything about the meaning of the term itself. Is it nearly synonymous with "old wives' tale" or "water cooler gossip" or "palace intrigue" perhaps? —2606:A000:4C0C:E200:831:EE2:9FFB:76D0 (talk) 09:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC) — Would this be better asked at the Language desk?[reply]

As you see at the article about the novel, the title is a reference to The Canterbury Tales. I'm reasonably sure it was not an existing idiom before the book was written, as you think. See also the explanation here. --69.159.60.147 (talk) 09:13, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I went through more than 20 pages of Google Books results without finding anything that didn't relate to Attwood's work. Tower Notes has some more detail about the choice of title besides the Chaucer hommage;

'The term ‘Handmaid’ derives from the Bible: particularly the story of Bilhah and Rachel discussed below, but it also references the Virgin Mary’s designation of herself as ‘the Handmaid of the Lord’ in Luke 1:38. The story of Mary’s complete abnegation of herself in accepting her pregnancy from God is twisted by the Gilead regime into a means of justifying enforced surrogacy on behalf of the powerful'. Alansplodge (talk) 09:29, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But if you restrict your Google Books search to books (ostensibly) dated before 1985, when Atwood published her novel, like so, you get 23 unique hits, which may be what the OP is talking about. Examining them you find that Google Books has without exception misdated them – a thing they are rather given to doing. Many of them are hits of the blurbs on the back of Cliff's Notes booklets listing, among many others, their notes on Atwood's book, Google Books having dated each booklet by the date of original appearance rather than the date of reprint. A few give no preview and hence can't be used as evidence of anything. The rest mention Atwood by name, or at least use the phrase as the title of a book with an unspecified author who clearly is Atwood. Conclusion: all appearances to the contrary, I don't think the phrase existed before Margaret Atwood. --Antiquary (talk) 10:24, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the Canterbury Tales, a group of fictional characters narrate tales. Most of the narrators are identified by their profession or social status, and not their names. Most do not even have names. The prologue gives detailed information on the characters' backgrounds, yet omits their names. The Knight for example is noted as having traveled and taken part in battles and campaigns in many areas of Europe, Western Asia, and North Africa, and is featured as an illustrious man. But not a word about his name.

One interpretation was that Chaucer intended his characters to be character types, representatives of entire social groups or social classes. The narrators are socializing with each other during a pilgrimage, but their words and their tales point to tensions among the group (and the groups they represent) and differing world-views on most topics. See: Chaucer's Pilgrims: An Historical Guide to the Pilgrims in The Canterbury Tales Dimadick (talk) 12:08, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"At some time during the writing, the novel’s name changed to “The Handmaid’s Tale,” partly in honor of Chaucer’s “Canterbury Tales,” but partly also in reference to fairy tales and folk tales: The story told by the central character partakes — for later or remote listeners — of the unbelievable, the fantastic, as do the stories told by those who have survived earth-shattering events". Margaret Atwood on What ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’ Means in the Age of Trump. By MARGARET ATWOOD, MARCH 10, 2017. Alansplodge (talk) 18:52, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks y'all for the discussion & links. I'm not certain that I've come across the term pre-1985, but the context was typically something like: after hearing a fanciful tale imagined to be true about actual people and events, the listener responds with "That's quite a handmaid's tale", indicating disbelief. I assumed the the title referenced the term -- but it could be visa-versa. —2606:A000:4C0C:E200:831:EE2:9FFB:76D0 (talk) 22:58, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been able to find any mention of "handmaid" meaning a servant outside of Biblical references and Attwood's book. This dictionary definition gives:

'2) Something that accompanies or is attendant on another: "the traditional notion that government was the handmaiden of business" (Doris Kearns Goodwin)'.

In the context of that idiom I found "Thus steam was at the start a handmaid to the sail." (1966) and "this bill made the Church of England the handmaid to the dissenters" (1825), but there was no "Sir Roger made merry with the handmaid" since it seems to have become obsolete in that sense many centuries ago. Original research of course. Alansplodge (talk) 00:49, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Evidently, Handmaiden is synonymous. 2606:A000:4C0C:E200:831:EE2:9FFB:76D0 (talk) 01:31, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the OED 1st edition, the section including "handmaid" was published in 1898. The oldest sense is defined there as "a female personal attendant or servant". It is marked as archaic in literal usage but still current in figurative use ("God's handmaid", "handmaid of heraldry", etc.). Examples of literal use from 1382 to 1856 are cited. In the current OED Online (this entry updated 2013), the literal usage is now marked as historical in later usage, i.e. it is still used to refer to past eras, and an example as recently as 1997 is cited. "Handmaiden" is defined in each edition as being equivalent to "handmaid" in this literal sense, with the same remarks about literal and figurative usage. --69.159.60.147 (talk) 06:23, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, the King James Version of the Bible goes with "handmaid" in Genesis 29:29 and "handmaiden" in [Luke 1:48. Alansplodge (talk) 13:46, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, by the way, the name is Atwood with one T. --69.159.60.147 (talk) 06:24, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mea culpa, I was thinking of Thomas Attwood (composer) (I did some work on I was glad awhile back). Alansplodge (talk) 13:46, 12 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2606:A000:4C0C:E200:831:EE2:9FFB:76D0 -- I bet it was Old wives' tale that you're remembering. As others have said "handmaid" was a semi-obscure/archaic primarily Biblical term before Margaret Atwood gave it greater prominence... AnonMoos (talk) 23:43, 13 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A British company description contains the following statements:

Accounts

First accounts made up to 31 July 2018

due by 17 April 2019

Confirmation statement

First statement date 16 July 2018

due by 30 July 2018

The confirmation statement part I have understood by now (would Confirmation statement be worth an article?), but what does the "accounts" section exactly mean? --KnightMove (talk) 09:57, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Every company must prepare annual accounts. The last day of the financial year is usually the anniversary of incorporation, but this can be changed (e.g. there may be tax advantages in ending your financial year shortly after the close of the fiscal year on 5 April). 86.171.242.205 (talk) 11:00, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The dates mean that the first annual accounts will cover the period from 01 July 2017 to 31 July 2018, and that they must be prepared and submitted to Companies House (which is in charge of business registration in the UK) by the 17 April 2019. Wymspen (talk) 11:51, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A website(s) that displays all sorts of inflatable products please. 123.108.244.116 (talk) 15:54, 11 December 2017 (UTC) [reply]

Googling "selling inflatables" yields a whole bunch of results. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 17:15, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

(relative to the home country currency) It might not be too much more than 50% since they have to pay attention to many other things too. Especially if the company has already saturated the less risky countries. Or do they try to play it safe and not favor currencies in an attempt at market timing (or even hedge by betting on bad currency results like futures hedgers)? Or does the strategy depend on company? Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 22:47, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There’s no general rule as to why a retail outlet owned by a multinational corporation (note: many would be locally-owned franchises) remain open that depends on exchange rates. In most cases, the value of the local currency vis-à-vis whatever currency the MNC might consider its ‘home’ currency is unrelated to the main issues: profit, market share, etc. DOR (HK) (talk) 14:48, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]