• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Reply to: Avoid banks if...

Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "Avoid banks if..."

Collapse

  • AlfredJPruffock
    replied
    Some say there is in fact pressure from the US to unhinge and destablise any EU bank -


    In the UK, after the costly and foolish bailout of Northern Rock earlier in the year, the Government of Prime Minister Gordon Brown has just announced a dramatic change in policy in the direction of Germany’s position. Britain's banks will get an unprecedented 50 billion-pound (€64 billion) government lifeline and emergency loans from the Bank of England.

    The government will buy preference shares from Royal Bank of Scotland Group Plc, Barclays Plc and at least six other banks, and provide about 250 billion pounds of loan guarantees to refinance debt, the Treasury said. The Bank of England will make at least 200 billion pounds available. The plan doesn't specify how much each bank will get.

    That means the UK Government will at least partially nationalize its most important international banks, rather than buy their bad loans as under the unworkable Paulson plan. Under such an approach, costs to UK taxpayers once the crisis abates and business returns to more normal conditions, the Government can sell the state shares back to a healthy bank at perhaps a nice profit to the Treasury. The Brown Government has apparently realized that the blanket guarantees it gave to Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley merely opened the floodgates of government costs without changing the problem.

    The new nationalization policy is a dramatic contrast to the Paulson ideological ‘free market’ approach of buying the worthless bonds held by the select banks Paulson chooses to save, rather than recapitalize those banks to allow them to continue to function.

    The battle lines drawn

    What has emerged are the outlines of two opposite approaches to the unfolding crisis.

    The Paulson plan is now clearly part of a project to create three colossal global financial giants—Citigroup, JP MorganChase and, of course, Paulson’s own Goldman Sachs, now conveniently enough a bank. Having successfully used fear and panic to wrestle a $700 billion bailout from the US taxpayers, now the big three will try to use their unprecedented muscle to ravage European banks in the years ahead. So long as the world’s largest financial credit rating agencies—Moody’s and Standard & Poors—are untouched by the scandals and Congressional hearings, the reorganized US financial power of Goldman Sachs, Citigroup and JP Morgan Chase could potentially regroup and advance their global agenda over the coming several years, walking over the ashes of a bankrupt American economy made bankrupt by their follies.

    By agreeing on a strategy of nationalizing what EU finance ministers deem are ‘EU banks too systemically strategic to fail,’ while guaranteeing bank deposits, the largest EU governments, Germany and the UK, in contrast to the US, have opted for what will in the longer run allow European banking giants to withstand the anticipated financial attacks from the likes of Goldman or Citigroup.

    The dramatic selloff of stocks across European bourses and across Asia is in reality a secondary and far less critical issue. According to market reports, the selloff is being driven mainly by US hedge funds desperate to raise cash as they realize the US economy is going into economic depression, that they are exposed and that the Paulson Plan does nothing to address that.

    A functioning solvent banking and interbank system is far the more strategic issue. The ABS debacle was ‘Made in New York.’ Nonetheless, its effects have to be isolated and viable EU banks defended in the public interest, not just the interest of Paulson’s banking cronies as in the US. Unregulated offshore vehicles such as hedge funds, unregulated banking, unregulated insurance all went into building the $80 trillion ABS Tsunami as I have called it. Certain more conservative EU hands are not about to buy the remedy being offered by Washington.

    The coordinated interest rate cut by the ECB and other European central banks while grabbing headlines, in effect do little to address the real problem: banks fear to lend to each other until their solvency is assured.

    By initiating state partial nationalizations across the EU, and rejecting the Berlusconi/Sarkozy bailout scheme, the governments of the EU, interestingly enough this time led by the German, are laying a more sound foundation to emerge from the crisis.

    Stay tuned, it’s far from over. This is a fight for the survival of the American Century which has been bvuilt since 1939 on the twin pillars of American financial dominance and American military dominance—Full Spectrum, Dominance.

    Leave a comment:


  • tay
    replied
    Feel free to add some insults to your posts... it would be an improvement to the baseless brainless drivel you normally post.
    Failing that, please show some proof that Santander is under threat. Every article I ahve read about them says they are def one of the safer banks around.
    If you have contrary facts I would like to hear them, as the more facts we have the better. Sadly you never provide any worthwhile facts... just juvenile ignorant scare mongering.

    Leave a comment:


  • sasguru
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    I suppose my name would have to go under yours on the trophy.
    pwnd.

    HTH

    Leave a comment:


  • sasguru
    replied
    Originally posted by cupidstunt View Post
    Didn't take long

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by sasguru View Post
    I can feel an Out Of Thin Air (TM) Village Idiot award coming up again for CyberCretin

    I suppose my name would have to go under yours on the trophy.

    Leave a comment:


  • cupidstunt
    replied
    Originally posted by sasguru View Post
    I can feel an Out Of Thin Air (TM) Village Idiot award coming up again for CyberCretin
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    If you prefer insults it can be done very easily, with little brainpower, as you no doubt have proved many times.


    Turkish by any chance ?
    Didn't take long

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by tay View Post
    Thats one more thing than you ever do....

    If you prefer insults it can be done very easily, with little brainpower, as you no doubt have proved many times.


    Turkish by any chance ?

    Leave a comment:


  • sasguru
    replied
    Originally posted by cupidstunt View Post
    Am just trying to find out if your statement wrt to Santander is based on any facts. Why not try and answer the question?
    I can feel an Out Of Thin Air (TM) Village Idiot award coming up again for CyberCretin

    Leave a comment:


  • sasguru
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    .. so what do you bring to the debate, apart from insults ?
    so what do you bring to the debate, apart from opinionated cretinism ?

    Leave a comment:


  • cupidstunt
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    .. so what do you bring to the debate, apart from insults ?
    Am just trying to find out if your statement wrt to Santander is based on any facts. Why not try and answer the question?

    Leave a comment:


  • tay
    replied
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    .. so what do you bring to the debate, apart from insults ?

    Thats one more thing than you ever do....

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by cupidstunt View Post
    Is this based on any fact, reasoning or special information or more opinionated drivel from a cretin?
    .. so what do you bring to the debate, apart from insults ?

    Leave a comment:


  • sasguru
    replied
    Originally posted by cojak View Post
    they meet any or all or these criteria

    1) They originate in a newly de-regulated economy/banking system
    2) They originate in politically unstable/potentially corrupt political systems (seriously, don't say "that's GB"...)
    3) Companies within the host country start to make newsworthy acquisitions at a fast pace.
    4) "High Growth/Tiger economy" phrases start creeping into these articles
    5) Lack of an income generating (manufacturing) base - where does all this money to buy things come from?
    6) They suddenly appear as No. 1 - the Sunday broadsheets "best rate" tables...
    7) If a UK bank - have they been bought out by a parent with any of the above?

    Examples:

    ICICI Bank UK
    First Bank of Nigeria (who in their right mind thought that was a good idea???)
    Ok I won't use point 2 as requested, but point 5 means don't touch a UK bank.

    Leave a comment:


  • cupidstunt
    replied
    Originally posted by cupidstunt View Post
    Is this based on any fact, reasoning or special information or more opinionated drivel from a cretin?
    Originally posted by Cyberman View Post
    Like any bank we do not know what their levels of subprime are, and also the Spanish housing market must surely be going through the worst recession ever. In fact the whole Spanish economy is in a mess because people will not go there on holiday from the UK because of the recession here and strong Euro. The UK is one of their biggest customers.

    Big does not mean safe with dried-up moneymarkets, greed etc, as we should all know by now, but I get very suspicious when people such as AtW tell me that they are the safest bank.
    Well I guess that answers that then.

    Leave a comment:


  • Cyberman
    replied
    Originally posted by Advocate View Post
    My understanding was that they're doing well because they operate under stricter controls and governance than most banks and therefore have more cash reserves...

    Like any bank we do not know what their levels of subprime are, and also the Spanish housing market must surely be going through the worst recession ever. In fact the whole Spanish economy is in a mess because people will not go there on holiday from the UK because of the recession here and strong Euro. The UK is one of their biggest customers.

    Big does not mean safe with dried-up moneymarkets, greed etc, as we should all know by now, but I get very suspicious when people such as AtW tell me that they are the safest bank.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X