The economic consequences of Brexit (Vol 2)
Discussion
Mrr T said:
I do not disagree with your assessment that the euro is creating strain and there seems little way out.
I also see you now say “sales” jobs will move from the UK to the rEU. So you are moving in my direction. Of cause it will not just be sales jobs, a regulated entity in the rEU, needs to have all key decision makers in the rEU. When the new rEU entity has more customers and better customers than the UK the natural progression is to move more and more to the rEU.
As for keeping euro clearing you must be joking! Would you allow contracts that have a fundamental impact on your currency and interest rates to be mainly cleared in a foreign country. We only kept them so far because of the SM.
Our biggest disagreement remains that you still seem to believe balance sheet remains important for servicing wholesale clients, my experience is in this sector is, bank do not want to have to use BS, and clients do not want to because it’s too expensive.
Forcing clearing to move maybe illegal under European rules (remember BoE beat the EC on that one at ECJ just 2 years ago), even Jamie Dimmon has come out an said moving it is a threat to Global Stability (and he has to be one of your poster boys) - mind you he's been wrong before with his intervention into Italian Banks!I also see you now say “sales” jobs will move from the UK to the rEU. So you are moving in my direction. Of cause it will not just be sales jobs, a regulated entity in the rEU, needs to have all key decision makers in the rEU. When the new rEU entity has more customers and better customers than the UK the natural progression is to move more and more to the rEU.
As for keeping euro clearing you must be joking! Would you allow contracts that have a fundamental impact on your currency and interest rates to be mainly cleared in a foreign country. We only kept them so far because of the SM.
Our biggest disagreement remains that you still seem to believe balance sheet remains important for servicing wholesale clients, my experience is in this sector is, bank do not want to have to use BS, and clients do not want to because it’s too expensive.
Balance sheet intensive activities won't be moving into Europe. The taxes are punitive (European Bank Levy is a captive prisoner market) and no-one can compete if the EC decides to do fractional reserve banking without the reserve (as is where they are heading). For a lot of these "wholesale" servicing roles, you are left with a skinny business (even if you have decision makers its all a scale game). If the prudential regs were not so screwed, I'd probably agree with your assessment that a lack of Passporting would possibly kill finance in London. You would move balance sheet into Europe and leave a few sales guys here sitting on Permanent Establishment models (which is how a lot of banks operate today). Even if you look at wholesale servicing, the US banks have it sewed up. Custody is only really BNP in Europe, even DB ran its custody out of London.
Mrr T said:
Counterparty risk is why the ECB wants it move. Derivatives clearing uses a central counterparty so all trades are given up to a single legal entity. If you where the ECB would you want billions of euro currency and interest rate derivatives with a legal entity outside the euro zone and soon to be outside the EU.
If I wanted the Euro to remain a reserve currency I probably would. wc98 said:
Sway said:
///ajd said:
If some Mini production migrates to the EU, it is quite possible it will be genuinely due to brexit.
That will be s
t result.
You can't make excuses or roll such news in glitter. It'll still be a turd-like outcome.
Want to stop that happening?
I'll tell you what, I'll make a similar wager that I did another poster who refused until I shifted the odds in his favour - £500 that the Mini plant in Oxford remains at full capacity or expands over the next three years, barring major non-Brexit related financial crisis (such as the Euro sThat will be s
t result.You can't make excuses or roll such news in glitter. It'll still be a turd-like outcome.
Want to stop that happening?
tting a brick or Trump fking up the dollar). If they lose staff, or drop production, you name the charity of choice for my deposit. If I win, the RNLI gets £500 of your cash.
Up for it? Or like the other poster, is the chance of your doomaggedon less than fifty/fifty?
i like your style, encouraging people to have skin in the game by showing financial commitment to back up their stated position tends to sort the wheat from the chaff very quickly. it would appear ajd and jawknee are chaff rather than wheat.
They may well stay if they get the tariff & barrier free access of course, which most seem to be demanding - including the famous Nissan & Toyota.
Only 3 years - reminded me of this:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-he...
10 years would be a sign of confidence.
///ajd said:
wc98 said:
Sway said:
///ajd said:
If some Mini production migrates to the EU, it is quite possible it will be genuinely due to brexit.
That will be st result.
You can't make excuses or roll such news in glitter. It'll still be a turd-like outcome.
Want to stop that happening?
I'll tell you what, I'll make a similar wager that I did another poster who refused until I shifted the odds in his favour - £500 that the Mini plant in Oxford remains at full capacity or expands over the next three years, barring major non-Brexit related financial crisis (such as the Euro sThat will be s
t result.You can't make excuses or roll such news in glitter. It'll still be a turd-like outcome.
Want to stop that happening?
tting a brick or Trump fking up the dollar). If they lose staff, or drop production, you name the charity of choice for my deposit. If I win, the RNLI gets £500 of your cash.
Up for it? Or like the other poster, is the chance of your doomaggedon less than fifty/fifty?
i like your style, encouraging people to have skin in the game by showing financial commitment to back up their stated position tends to sort the wheat from the chaff very quickly. it would appear ajd and jawknee are chaff rather than wheat.
They may well stay if they get the tariff & barrier free access of course, which most seem to be demanding - including the famous Nissan & Toyota.
Only 3 years - reminded me of this:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/politics/politics-he...
10 years would be a sign of confidence.
Seeing as the posts you've been making related to imminent job losses (24000 of them!),I figured three years was easily sufficient for negotiations to conclude and decisions to be made.
If tariffs are such a big deal, they'll shift pronto, model cycle or not.
No one is disputing they'd prefer tariff free access - you're the one stating that it won't happen and armageddon will occur (sometimes involving more job losses than the company actually employs).
UK Airlines must apparently move their head offices to the EU and have a majority of their capital shares owned by EU shareholders.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...
Quote:
"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.
Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.
The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."
I didn't see this one coming.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...
Quote:
"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.
Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.
The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."
I didn't see this one coming.kelvink said:
UK Airlines must apparently move their head offices to the EU and have a majority of their capital shares owned by EU shareholders.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...
Quote:
"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.
Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.
The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."
I didn't see this one coming.
That's just for flights within the EU, it won't affect airlines flying in or out of the EU. Any UK airline that did want to fly routes within the EU would just have to set up an EU subsidiary. http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...
Quote:
"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.
Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.
The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."
I didn't see this one coming.Dr Jekyll said:
kelvink said:
UK Airlines must apparently move their head offices to the EU and have a majority of their capital shares owned by EU shareholders.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...
Quote:
"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.
Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.
The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."
I didn't see this one coming.
That's just for flights within the EU, it won't affect airlines flying in or out of the EU. Any UK airline that did want to fly routes within the EU would just have to set up an EU subsidiary. http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...
Quote:
"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.
Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.
The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."
I didn't see this one coming.As previously discussed, many already do.
Further, whilst it's made out that this applies to any nation's carriers outside the EU, there are several examples of deals under open skies programmes.
We'll get a nice steady trickle, industry by industry of 'problems' over the next few weeks - all driven by businesses trying to influence the negotiation teams to act in their specific interest.
Which is entirely normal, and hopefully the public and politicians remember that the big picture is key. I'm certain there'll be winners and losers in the end result, the important thing is the net position as a nation...
Further, whilst it's made out that this applies to any nation's carriers outside the EU, there are several examples of deals under open skies programmes.
We'll get a nice steady trickle, industry by industry of 'problems' over the next few weeks - all driven by businesses trying to influence the negotiation teams to act in their specific interest.
Which is entirely normal, and hopefully the public and politicians remember that the big picture is key. I'm certain there'll be winners and losers in the end result, the important thing is the net position as a nation...
Sway said:
As previously discussed, many already do.
Further, whilst it's made out that this applies to any nation's carriers outside the EU, there are several examples of deals under open skies programmes.
We'll get a nice steady trickle, industry by industry of 'problems' over the next few weeks - all driven by businesses trying to influence the negotiation teams to act in their specific interest.
Which is entirely normal, and hopefully the public and politicians remember that the big picture is key. I'm certain there'll be winners and losers in the end result, the important thing is the net position as a nation...
I'd be worried about Slasher's mental health with all the catastrophising that's about to come. He might want to take a news and forum holiday for a while!Further, whilst it's made out that this applies to any nation's carriers outside the EU, there are several examples of deals under open skies programmes.
We'll get a nice steady trickle, industry by industry of 'problems' over the next few weeks - all driven by businesses trying to influence the negotiation teams to act in their specific interest.
Which is entirely normal, and hopefully the public and politicians remember that the big picture is key. I'm certain there'll be winners and losers in the end result, the important thing is the net position as a nation...
Needs a reminder to take a leaf out of Alonso Harris's book:
stongle said:
Sway said:
As previously discussed, many already do.
Further, whilst it's made out that this applies to any nation's carriers outside the EU, there are several examples of deals under open skies programmes.
We'll get a nice steady trickle, industry by industry of 'problems' over the next few weeks - all driven by businesses trying to influence the negotiation teams to act in their specific interest.
Which is entirely normal, and hopefully the public and politicians remember that the big picture is key. I'm certain there'll be winners and losers in the end result, the important thing is the net position as a nation...
I'd be worried about Slasher's mental health with all the catastrophising that's about to come. He might want to take a news and forum holiday for a while!Further, whilst it's made out that this applies to any nation's carriers outside the EU, there are several examples of deals under open skies programmes.
We'll get a nice steady trickle, industry by industry of 'problems' over the next few weeks - all driven by businesses trying to influence the negotiation teams to act in their specific interest.
Which is entirely normal, and hopefully the public and politicians remember that the big picture is key. I'm certain there'll be winners and losers in the end result, the important thing is the net position as a nation...
Needs a reminder to take a leaf out of Alonso Harris's book:
Thank you sir. It's a long time since I've watched Training Day, and it is such a damned fine film your reminder has set the tone of this evening's viewing.
I've been considering what the forum would have been like had it been around at the time of the ERM or Maastricht. Bloody entertaining I'm assuming!
kelvink said:
UK Airlines must apparently move their head offices to the EU and have a majority of their capital shares owned by EU shareholders.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...
Quote:
"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.
Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.
The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."
I didn't see this one coming.
It's a great example of why the EU is utterly bankrupt as a location for growth. An industry that requires major capital investment to be competitive and grow is restricted to where they can receive their investment from.http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...
Quote:
"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.
Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.
The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."
I didn't see this one coming.Investors will get round these rules easily, but it's a great illustration of the mind set within the EU.
stongle said:
Forcing clearing to move maybe illegal under European rules (remember BoE beat the EC on that one at ECJ just 2 years ago), even Jamie Dimmon has come out an said moving it is a threat to Global Stability (and he has to be one of your poster boys) - mind you he's been wrong before with his intervention into Italian Banks!
Forcing euro clearing to be carried out inside a euro country was found to be illegal by the ECJ under SM rules. However, we are leaving the SM so rules no longer apply. The ECB cannot stop euro clearing in the UK however they can decide to not recognise the CCP for regulatory purposes. Which will mean most will move to rEU CCP clearing.Edited by Mrr T on Thursday 23 March 09:49
Mrr T said:
stongle said:
Forcing clearing to move maybe illegal under European rules (remember BoE beat the EC on that one at ECJ just 2 years ago), even Jamie Dimmon has come out an said moving it is a threat to Global Stability (and he has to be one of your poster boys) - mind you he's been wrong before with his intervention into Italian Banks!
Forcing euro clearing to be carried out inside a euro country was found to be illegal by the ECJ under SM rules. However, we are leaving the SM so rules no longer apply. The ECB cannot stop euro clearing in the UK however they can decide to not recognise the CCP for regulatory purposes. Which will mean most will move to rEU CCP clearing.FiF said:
Dr Jekyll said:
kelvink said:
UK Airlines must apparently move their head offices to the EU and have a majority of their capital shares owned by EU shareholders.
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...
Quote:
"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.
Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.
The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."
I didn't see this one coming.
That's just for flights within the EU, it won't affect airlines flying in or out of the EU. Any UK airline that did want to fly routes within the EU would just have to set up an EU subsidiary. http://www.msn.com/en-gb/money/news/uk-based-airli...
Quote:
"EU chiefs have warned airlines including easyJet, Ryanair and British Airways that they will need to relocate headquarters and sell off shares to European nationals if they want to continue flying routes within continental Europe after Brexit.
Executives at major carriers have been reminded during recent private meetings with officials that to continue to operate on routes across the continent – for instance from Milan to Paris – they must have a significant base on EU territory and that a majority of their capital shares must be EU-owned.
The development, just days from the triggering of article 50, potentially makes it more likely that the carriers will now act to restructure, with economic consequences for the UK, including a loss of jobs."
I didn't see this one coming.
kelvink said:
UK Airlines must apparently move their head offices to the EU and have a majority of their capital shares owned by EU shareholders.
I didn't see this one coming.
Neither did they I didn't see this one coming.
turbobloke said:
Mrr T said:
stongle said:
Forcing clearing to move maybe illegal under European rules (remember BoE beat the EC on that one at ECJ just 2 years ago), even Jamie Dimmon has come out an said moving it is a threat to Global Stability (and he has to be one of your poster boys) - mind you he's been wrong before with his intervention into Italian Banks!
Forcing euro clearing to be carried out inside a euro country was found to be illegal by the ECJ under SM rules. However, we are leaving the SM so rules no longer apply. The ECB cannot stop euro clearing in the UK however they can decide to not recognise the CCP for regulatory purposes. Which will mean most will move to rEU CCP clearing.turbobloke said:
Is it possible that they will decide the other way to your predicted decision?
Absolutely. CCP selection is a not a simple task and clearing exceptionally complicated. Resolution and margining rules are hugely important and moving clearing of major CCYs presents massive global stability risks (as Jamie Dimon points out but MrTT choses to ignore despite him being the poster-boy for passporting). There simply are too many other factors around risk and modelling that trump passporting - its exceptionally unlikely that any European Clearing House has the resolution capabilities or even correct credit floor for margining - Particularly if you look at risk behaviour and accelerated stress events (BREXIT was a case in point with intraday margin call ramping of £14bn). European CCPs have been notorious for a race to the credit floor for Margin, something the UK has been against particularly LCH. Again it comes down to risk. Passporting Vs Risk is like tackling a tank with a pea-shooter.
stongle said:
Passporting Vs Risk is like tackling a tank with a pea-shooter.
One Brit had form, although with an umbrella...https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digby_Tatham-Warte...
Mrr T said:
Having taken the case to the ECJ I think we can assume not. I also understand the ECB view. The BOE would not be happy to see the majority of GBP derivatives cleared outside the UK.
"We can assume not"? I think the assumption is just making an ass out of you.You trust the ECB, an entity locked into a death spiral with no way out, a ballooning balance sheet with "gamed" liquidity scoring and at the behest of the EC (that makes poor competition decisions that further screw the Countries it represents - DB / LSE Merger)?
I do love to know where you trade, I'd be on the other end of it all day long!
Sway said:
...
I've been considering what the forum would have been like had it been around at the time of the ERM or Maastricht. Bloody entertaining I'm assuming!
This is an interesting angle... I've been considering what the forum would have been like had it been around at the time of the ERM or Maastricht. Bloody entertaining I'm assuming!
//ajd and MrrT... What were your views on these things at the time?
Do you think we had a lucky escape with the Euro?
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff