Earlier today, a BBC Wales political correspondent appeared on BBC Scotland, and claimed that the Labour government in Wales had made a strategic decision to "bank" the concessions made by the UK government so far, because of the fear that London might not deliver them if a formal agreement wasn't reached. He added that the Welsh government remained more than happy to "piggyback" on any further concessions secured by the Scottish government. (If true, this raises the obvious question of why Scottish Labour are sabotaging their Welsh colleagues' strategy by demanding that Nicola Sturgeon should back down.) I've no idea how much credence to give to the idea that London could have backtracked on the offers they'd already made, but let's assume for the sake of argument that there was something in it. Now that there is a formal agreement between London and Cardiff, the concessions made until now are to all intents and purposes locked in as far as Scotland is concerned as well. It would be politically inconceivable for the UK government to grab more power from the Scottish Parliament than from the Welsh Assembly. What that means is that Nicola Sturgeon now has much less to lose from the rest of the negotiations than she previously did. If the UK government fail to offer anything more of substance, she can afford to stand her ground on the Continuity Bill safe in the knowledge that, even in the worst-case scenario of the Supreme Court striking the Bill down outright, the deal announced with Wales would still be the minimum that would have to be delivered in Scotland. There is no real option for London to row back on that.
In snooker parlance, Nicola Sturgeon suddenly has the luxury of a 'shot to nothing'. Not too shabby for someone who is supposedly "isolated" and "under pressure".