TF}$ on $cz$, i.e. the red pints. The two straight dashed lines correspond to 95% confidence levels of this regression. The blue points show a pattern that could mistakenly be confused with actual galaxy infall onto Virgo. However, this pattern is entirely due to inhomogeneous Malmquist bias: Galaxies scattered to large estimated $d_{\rm TF}$ beyond the cluster, will also have a negative inferred $V_{\rm TF}$. The effect of this Malmquist bias will be more pronounced for more distant clusters which have larger absolute errors on $d_{\rm TF}$. The red points do not show a clear infall (on Virgo) of galaxies in the immediate vicinity of Virgo. [@Kara10] presents an impressive study of the observed flow of 1792 galaxies near Virgo. Taken into account the inhomogeneous Malmquist bias, it is hard to detect a clear infall signature in the near vicinity of Virgo in this study as all (although the focus of their paper is different).

The constraints given in figures (\[fig:sigom\])–(\[fig:gamma\]) show that the bulk flow alone provides useful additional constraints on the cosmological parameters. To achieve tighter constraints one must investigate the full information in the peculiar velocity measurements. This could be done by analysis of power spectra and 