UBS - One Billion

[crankedup]

Hopefully those that chose to defend the corrupt and evil banking industry are now seeing the errors of their considerations. Its not old news this LIBOR rate rigging scandal and now that UBS has been fined one billion pounds for its part played we expect others to follow. Our own RBS is apparently next in line.
But what of those employees that actually had a hand in this gross misconduct, walk away with a smile and fat pension seems remarkably punishment free. Corporate misconduct is one thing we now need to extend this to personal culpability and punishment that fits the crime? Is this reasonable?

[trickywoo]

I agree. The people responsible need proper jail time and I'd even go as far as personal fines - you get a 'victim surcharge' for everything nowadays why not this?

[moustachebandit]

This is only going to get bigger - I reckon we will see a few other Banks hitting the headlines for the sames reasons!

[sidicks]

crankedup said:

Hopefully those that chose to defend the corrupt and evil banking industry are now seeing the errors of their considerations.

Has anyone sought to defend those involved in LIBOR rigging or have they taken a more sensible and informed view that trying to treat a while industry as corrupt due to the actions of a few is childlike / idiotic in the extreme?


I suppose we should view ALL doctors as corrupt based on the actions of Harold Shipman or ALL TV presenters as corrupt based on the alleged actions of Sir Jimmy Saville?

Seriously, the amount of crap that some people write about banking (where they clearly don't understand the first thing about the industry) is becoming really boring.

[DJRC]

What I dont get is why are the majority of the fines going to US authorities?

[Newc]

"Hi - is that UBS? SEC here. We're just wondering if you would like to continue to operate in the US and offer services to US residents and receive money from US institutional investors ?"

"Er, yes"

"Great. That'll be a fine of $1bn then please. Cheque to the usual address."

[trickywoo]

sidicks said:

Has anyone sought to defend those involved in LIBOR rigging

I think they have yes. There is a pretty strong banking contingent on here that shout ignorance of everyone bar themselves as a defense of many of the ills of modern banking practice.

I don't really have the time to find them but I've seen lots of posts in the early days of the scandal implying that if it did go on the percentages involved were so small they didn't affect the public and it was just a bit of fun.

I personally find the no consequence attitude to risk which has been adopted by the industry repulsive.

[crankedup]

sidicks said:

crankedup said:

Hopefully those that chose to defend the corrupt and evil banking industry are now seeing the errors of their considerations.

Has anyone sought to defend those involved in LIBOR rigging or have they taken a more sensible and informed view that trying to treat a while industry as corrupt due to the actions of a few is childlike / idiotic in the extreme?


I suppose we should view ALL doctors as corrupt based on the actions of Harold Shipman or ALL TV presenters as corrupt based on the alleged actions of Sir Jimmy Saville?

Seriously, the amount of crap that some people write about banking (where they clearly don't understand the first thing about the industry) is becoming really boring.

Do YOU defend the actions of the corrupt and evil banking industry?
I have in the past defended some actions of the banking industry, but not those actions that I state in this thread, big difference.

[loafer123]

There are two different issues.

UBS have been heavily fined as they were adjusting libor submissions for profit.

The origin of the investigation was, however, related to the fact that lots of banks underreported libor during the financial crisis for fear of revealing how bad the market viewed their credit at the time.

There is an excellent Christmas video on FT Alphaville today which deals with this and many other misunderstood issues from this year.

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/2012/12/19/1313012/a-gr...

[sidicks]

trickywoo said:

I think they have yes. There is a pretty strong banking contingent on here that shout ignorance of everyone bar themselves as a defense of many of the ills of modern banking practice.

I don't really have the time to find them but I've seen lots of posts in the early days of the scandal implying that if it did go on the percentages involved were so small they didn't affect the public and it was just a bit of fun.

I think you'll find that the actions of the traders were severely criticised - the practice was certainly NOT defended - but that it was explained that the impact on end customers was likely to be small (as there were plenty of misleading claims that customers had incurred billions of losses because of the fixing).

trickywoo said:

I personally find the no consequence attitude to risk which has been adopted by the industry repulsive.

Oh, I see, another idiot who is unable to differentiate between 'the industry' and a small proportion of people within the industry...

[sidicks]

crankedup said:

Do YOU defend the actions of the corrupt and evil banking industry?

I have in the past defended some actions of the banking industry, but not those actions that I state in this thread, big difference.

Some of the activities that have taken place are indefensible - few people would argue against that, and few would try and defend the individuals that carried out those actions.

However, continually talking about the industry being corrupt, rather than a small proportion of the people within the industry, is pure idiotic rhetoric.

[Ozzie Osmond]

sidicks said:

I suppose we should view ALL doctors as corrupt based on the actions of Harold Shipman or ALL TV presenters as corrupt based on the alleged actions of Sir Jimmy Saville?

The only difference is that in the last decade every bank appears to have been demonstrably either,

a) bankrupt, or
b) corrupt.

I am astounded that anyone is still jumping about trying to defend this wholly discredited sector.

[Eric Mc]

So - were these serial "misdemeanours" the result of the behaviour of a few "bad'uns" or are they symptomatic of a particular culture prevelant in the industry?

[shoestring7]

Except £1B is a week's pocket money for UBS>

SS7

[trickywoo]

Ozzie Osmond said:

I am astounded that anyone is still jumping about trying to defend this wholly discredited sector.

The defense seems to be 'the bigger boy told me to do it' or 'you are all stupid and don't understand'.

[sidicks]

Ozzie Osmond said:

The only difference is that in the last decade every bank appears to have been demonstrably either,

a) bankrupt, or
b) corrupt.

I am astounded that anyone is still jumping about trying to defend this wholly discredited sector.

I am astounded that anyone with half a brain is unable to differentiate between the tens of thousands of bank employees that do valuable and honest jobs and the relatively few rogues that undertake inappropriate and in some cases crinimal activities which may have significant financial impact.

[172ff]

sidicks said:

crankedup said:

Hopefully those that chose to defend the corrupt and evil banking industry are now seeing the errors of their considerations.

Has anyone sought to defend those involved in LIBOR rigging or have they taken a more sensible and informed view that trying to treat a while industry as corrupt due to the actions of a few is childlike / idiotic in the extreme?


I suppose we should view ALL doctors as corrupt based on the actions of Harold Shipman or ALL TV presenters as corrupt based on the alleged actions of Sir Jimmy Saville?

Seriously, the amount of crap that some people write about banking (where they clearly don't understand the first thing about the industry) is becoming really boring.

Bit like all rubbish thats spouted on here about every single benefit claimant being scum...

[sidicks]

172ff said:

Bit like all rubbish thats spouted on here about every single benefit claimant being scum...

I agree that would be equally stupid - has anyone actually claimed that or is the usual misquoting, where a sensible comment about the welfare system needing to be reviewed is suddenly turned on it's head to imply that "all benefit claimaints are scroungers" etc??

[sidicks]

Eric Mc said:

So - were these serial "misdemeanours" the result of the behaviour of a few "bad'uns" or are they symptomatic of a particular culture prevelant in the industry?

The number of people involved in Libor fixing is probably measured in 'tens'.

The number of people involved in the banking industry is probably measured in 'tens of thousands'.

You 'do the math'....

[voyds9]

Really don't understand LIBOR but what I can see

10 banks get their heads together to decide how much to charge for lending to each other

1 other bank BofE decides what rate to lend to the banks

Getting parallels

One Ring to rule them all,
One Ring to find them,
One Ring to bring them all,
And in the darkness bind them.