£20 Billion to promote lending whilst the Bonuses go on:

[scotal]

Steffan said:

Very revealing Soovy.

Can you just explain to me why the banks went bust if everything is so well regulated and secure?

Please.

He didn't say well regulated, he said heavily regulated.

The FSA deserve a far greater portion of blame for the current mess than they are currently given.
I note the Margaret Cole, having dumped her £340k a year job at the regulator has popped up at PWC, as a partner, where they say she will take home £740k p.a. Will you be moaning about the amount of money available to accountancy firms next?

[walm]

Steffan said:

Have any of the lessons that should have been learned in the Banking crisis?
I fear not.

Well it would seem that one lesson has been learned.
Don't lend to "desperate" small businesses!!

Which would you rather have Steffan?
1. Lax lending criteria driving bubbles.
2. Sensible lending to viable businesses.

Are you a moron?

[Soovy]

Steffan said:

Soovy said:

Marf said:

Steffan said:

Soovy.

I would think you work in Financial Services or Financial Investment.

Would I be right?

Check his profile, lawyer working in derivatives. What is the relevance of that?

He thinks that I am working for one of these mythical companies which has total job security (no it doesn't - look at what has happened at Worldspreads last week), huge bonuses and unlimited champagne and hookers for all concerned.

He has no clue at all about how the City works, and what we do. We are scrupulously honest, heavily regulated and have a professional conscience at my shop.

Very revealing Soovy.

Can you just explain to me why the banks went bust if everything is so well regulated and secure?

Please.

Not sure I can be bothered. And I don't work for a bank, I work for a provider of complex financial products. We don't have a banking licence.

But as you won't undertsand the difference there's not much point in me even trying to explain it.

There are none so deaf as those who will not listen.

[fido]

Du1point8 said:

Lloyds just being Lloyds and also having a lot of exposure...

Lloyds had no exposure until they were hoodwinked ino buying HBOS. Sadly, there was no one to regulate Moron Brown.

[Sonic]

Steffan said:

Very revealing Soovy.

Can you just explain to me why the banks went bust if everything is so well regulated and secure?

Please.

Because the regs were flawed.

"Blame the game not the player."

[munky]

fido said:

Du1point8 said:

Lloyds just being Lloyds and also having a lot of exposure...

Lloyds had no exposure until they were hoodwinked ino buying HBOS. Sadly, there was no one to regulate Moron Brown.

Indeed, and then Brown & Darling lied - yes, lied - to Lloyds shareholders about the size of the secret emergency loan given to HBOS, so that they would vote for the merger. Result being, Lloyds shareholders lost about 95% of their investment (depending on what date you take the share price etc). Not to mention the biggest shareholders of Lloyds were also shareholders of HBOS and other banks, so small private shareholders voting "no" got outvoted (if they even got to vote)

Edited by munky on Tuesday 20th March 16:00

[Du1point8]

fido said:

Du1point8 said:

Lloyds just being Lloyds and also having a lot of exposure...

Lloyds had no exposure until they were hoodwinked ino buying HBOS. Sadly, there was no one to regulate Moron Brown.

ah... was that the one they tried to pull out of and the government forced them to go ahead with?

been a while since I went over the documents for a read.

[roachcoach]

Du1point8 said:

fido said:

Du1point8 said:

Lloyds just being Lloyds and also having a lot of exposure...

Lloyds had no exposure until they were hoodwinked ino buying HBOS. Sadly, there was no one to regulate Moron Brown.

ah... was that the one they tried to pull out of and the government forced them to go ahead with?

been a while since I went over the documents for a read.

Has it ever been decided if the sacrificial lamb was better than the alternate though?

[0a]

I don't understand how this works. Eg, this article

Independent said:

Banks taking part in the credit easing scheme will provide loans one percentage point lower than they would otherwise have been. Government guarantees will allow the banks to borrow at lower rates and they will pass this on to the small firms.

"Otherwise would have been"??? also

Independent said:

The Treasury said it is not guaranteeing individual loans to businesses and so not taking on the credit risk of loans, which is retained by the banks. Royal Bank of Scotland, Lloyds Banking Group, Barclays, Santander and fledgling lender Aldermore have agreed to take part.

What is the government guaranteeing then to make these loans safer, and thus allow banks to borrow at lower interest rates. Or am I being thick?

[pilchardthecat]

Sonic said:

Steffan said:

Very revealing Soovy.

Can you just explain to me why the banks went bust if everything is so well regulated and secure?

Please.

Because the regs were flawed.

"Blame the game not the player."

My favourite quote on the subject;

"Blaming greed for a banking crisis is like blaming gravity for a plane crash"

[Du1point8]

roachcoach said:

Du1point8 said:

fido said:

Du1point8 said:

Lloyds just being Lloyds and also having a lot of exposure...

Lloyds had no exposure until they were hoodwinked ino buying HBOS. Sadly, there was no one to regulate Moron Brown.

ah... was that the one they tried to pull out of and the government forced them to go ahead with?

been a while since I went over the documents for a read.

Has it ever been decided if the sacrificial lamb was better than the alternate though?

To use a bank as the sacrificial lamb and then blame them in the same breath... Then blame all bankers when the only banks that had severe issues being the ones that had the greatest mortgage exposure to the public... nice way to divert most of the blame.

Fred goodwin however, should have known better than to trust the barclays review and not doing a proper one at RBS, before jumping in an beating them to the merger. Otherwise they would have survived.

[roachcoach]

Du1point8 said:

To use a bank as the sacrificial lamb and then blame them in the same breath... Then blame all bankers when the only banks that had severe issues being the ones that had the greatest mortgage exposure to the public... nice way to divert most of the blame.

Of course it is, the other biggest blind spot here is the greedy public - had they not borrowed like lunatics, we'd have been fine too. Takes two to cause a default situation. Clearly, the bankers wielding shotguns forcing us to take unaffordable loans bypassed my house. Or I was out at the time.

[Soovy]

roachcoach said:

Du1point8 said:

To use a bank as the sacrificial lamb and then blame them in the same breath... Then blame all bankers when the only banks that had severe issues being the ones that had the greatest mortgage exposure to the public... nice way to divert most of the blame.

Of course it is, the other biggest blind spot here is the greedy public - had they not borrowed like lunatics, we'd have been fine too. Takes two to cause a default situation. Clearly, the bankers wielding shotguns forcing us to take unaffordable loans bypassed my house. Or I was out at the time.

But don't you see, they made us borrow, they forced us to take out those big mortgages at 110% so that I could become a property millionaire like Sarah Beeney

[BoRED S2upid]

Oh I do enjoy these threads. Someone pass the popcorn.

[0a]

[powerstroke]

IMHO the most sucsessfull and long lived small bussneses do not borrow money but If they do its only for important things , not so they can have the latest van and a fancy car !! friends in bussiness who did "creep and go" started with old vans and made do with old equipment have done far better than the all new every thing on credit people and now have assets and sound well capitised ballence sheets , banks and asset finance co's are there to make money for themselves If they dont want to lend fk em and start small and live within means , banks are nothing but blood sucking parisites and best avoided .....
and as for the goverment medeling, what part of let the market decide dont you get!!! fk off and leave bussiness alone, reduce red tape and taxes esp fuel if you want some growth.....

[Soovy]

0a said:

What could possibly go wrong.

[0a]

Soovy said:

What could possibly go wrong.

I remember AB testing a secured loan and mortgage formfill back in the day using blonde vs brunette (blonde won) and blonde vs "dirty blonde" (dirty blonde won).

Yes we did have significant improvements in conversion rates from a bit more boob.

[Randy Winkman]

Soovy said:

roachcoach said:

Du1point8 said:

To use a bank as the sacrificial lamb and then blame them in the same breath... Then blame all bankers when the only banks that had severe issues being the ones that had the greatest mortgage exposure to the public... nice way to divert most of the blame.

Of course it is, the other biggest blind spot here is the greedy public - had they not borrowed like lunatics, we'd have been fine too. Takes two to cause a default situation. Clearly, the bankers wielding shotguns forcing us to take unaffordable loans bypassed my house. Or I was out at the time.

But don't you see, they made us borrow, they forced us to take out those big mortgages at 110% so that I could become a property millionaire like Sarah Beeney

The public are responsible for their own lives - bankers are responsible for banks. If Tescos goes bust, it's Tescos bosses fault, not the customers'. Why is it different for banks?

[P-Jay]

Frankly, it doesn't matter to me if it's a Politico or a Senior Banker spewing about promoting lending - I have to assume its total bks.

Almost 3 years ago to the day I heard Alistair Darling saying he'd instructed RBS and Lloyds-TSB to make X £Billion of Credit available to small businesses.

The next day I heard Stephen Heston say they were "totally committed to ensuring that credit would be made available to small and medium sized businesses"

The day after, all my colleges and I were herded into a crowed room to listen to an short speech via a speaker phone, where our new Chief Exec (second day in the job if I recall) gobbed off in management speak for about 90 seconds and then said, if you job title is X, Y, Z you no longer have a job - Classy. It was about 60% of the people in the room, he then gobbed off for another 45 mins telling us all how things would be so much better now these pointless roles had been removed - really enjoyed that as you can imagine.

My role and the role of everyone else who got their marching orders that day? Arranging loans and finance for Small to Medium sized business for RBS and its subsidiaries.

The government will ask the banks to lend and offer some lip service help for it, the banks will claim they tried but the viable businesses didn’t want to borrow and the they couldn’t lend to the unavailable ones.