How do we think EU negotiations will go?

[Eddie Strohacker]

hyphen said:

Keep your blinkers on whilst you eat your squid.

You know people can see this right? This embarrassing lower sixth schtick you keep typing out?

[Sway]

Mrr T said:

Sway said:

Tuna said:

Interesting piece on Order-Order with regards to passporting, essentially saying it's not seen as a priority outside of Remain reporters like the Independent and Standard:

https://order-order.com/2017/11/20/city-moved-on-p...

Guido said:

the International Regulatory Strategy Group, which is co-sponsored by TheCityUK and The City of London Corporation, published a report on “Alternatives to Passporting” and concluded “the focus of the Brexit negotiations should be on designing and delivering a bespoke UK-EU deal rather than reforming or adapting existing frameworks“

Indeed. Hence my mention earlier of 'enhanced equivalence' as an option.

For all of MrrrT's assertions that everyone will have their euro subsidiaries setup and ready to go in a year's time (or even three years), it's just not feasible.

Ignoring the challenges of capitalising those new organisations to meet the regs without impacting the barely held capital requirements we put in place post 08 (and opened the printing presses for) - just look at RBS. Required to divest it's English business neatly a decade ago, and still nowhere near actually achieving it...

I expect the Guido article reflects the fact that the whole FS industry has now spent months and millions on working out how to deal with the loss of passporting. In the next year these companies will do the development necessary to put those solutions in place before March 2019.

All of the major FS companies have regulated entities in the rEU. Some extra regulatory approvals maybe needed but for some reason rEU regulators are being very accommodating, Moving capital around is not difficult, even if it’s needed since most large FS companies have little interest in an capital intensive businesses.

The FS industry will be ready to service its rEU customers. This will involve jobs moving from the UK, at first this will be the minimum but for many FS companies where 60/65% of the business is with rEU customers guess where the growth will be.

You voted for it, you got it. Brexit tax anyone?

I'm aware they've already got regulated entities in the rEU - I've worked in a few!

They may not have much interest in capital intensive business - however the regulators do, and seeing as much of the required capitalisation has been funded by the BoE, I wonder how supportive the British electorate will be with that capital being moved to a foreign entity to support that business risk, rather than the UK business...

Whilst I'm now out of FS, I do look at the chellenges of divesting customers into a new legal entity, when nothing of the regulatory or location landscape is changing - nearly a decade and frankly RBS are nowhere near it. Achieving the same whilst moving across legislative borders (which they are - there's little in the way of pan-EU detailed harmonisation) seems a far bigger task. For those who are serving majority of their customers in rEU, why aren't they already based in rEU? Could it be increased fragmentation killing resource efficiency, increasing consumer costs, and duplication of bodies in regulated roles? That's not necessarily going to create a growth condition compared to today...

Pre-ref, you were quoting up to 400k jobs moving, what's your current prediction?

[hyphen]

Eddie Strohacker said:

hyphen said:

Keep your blinkers on whilst you eat your squid.

You know people can see this right? This embarrassing lower sixth schtick you keep typing out?

Yes, and they can see that when it comes to Goldmans, you are convinced of their integrity without refusing my claims

Put up or shut up.

[Eddie Strohacker]

hyphen said:

Eddie Strohacker said:

hyphen said:

Keep your blinkers on whilst you eat your squid.

You know people can see this right? This embarrassing lower sixth schtick you keep typing out?

Yes, and they can see that when it comes to Goldmans, you are convinced of their integrity

Put up or shut up.

No And I'll say this slowly so even you can grasp it, Lloyd Blankfein is by any measure a highly successful man but you prefer to call him chief scumbag which is so peevishly childish that even my ten year old would not bother with it.

The bit you're unwilling to admit however, but which is bleeding obvious is Blankfein who in any other universe is nothing on any level to either of us is pro remain, so in this new landscape of distorted allegiances & permanent political fracture, you're making a huge amount of hay over someone practically no one in real life here gives a tuppenny toss about. And doing it like Kevin the teenager into the bargain. Bloody hell, politics eh?

[anonymous-user]

Just been reading that Davis said that the agencies were part of the negotiation - which I suppose is evidence that the EU 27 have used this to demonstrate they are playing hard ball.

[Zod]

desolate said:

Just been reading that Davis said that the agencies were part of the negotiation - which I suppose is evidence that the EU 27 have used this to demonstrate they are playing hard ball.

Just makes himself look an idiot by saying that. In what universe would the EU allow two of its important regulatory agencies to be located in a Third Country?

[Jockman]

desolate said:

Just been reading that Davis said that the agencies were part of the negotiation - which I suppose is evidence that the EU 27 have used this to demonstrate they are playing hard ball.

I'm not sure why anyone would expect them to stay.

[hyphen]

Eddie Strohacker said:

No And I'll say this slowly so even you can grasp it, Lloyd Blankfein is by any measure a highly successful man but you prefer to call him chief scumbag which is so peevishly childish that even my ten year old would not bother with it.

The bit you're unwilling to admit however, but which is bleeding obvious is Blankfein who in any other universe is nothing on any level to either of us is pro remain, so in this new landscape of distorted allegiances & permanent political fracture, you're making a huge amount of hay over someone practically no one in real life here gives a tuppenny toss about. And doing it like Kevin the teenager into the bargain. Bloody hell, politics eh?

By any measure? ANY.... In your mind perhaps he is.

And no, I don't care if he is pro or leave.

I do care that on the day of a major EU conference he tweets wholehearted support for Frankfurt and then rightly find it amusing when he starts to backtrack...

[anonymous-user]

Jockman said:

desolate said:

Just been reading that Davis said that the agencies were part of the negotiation - which I suppose is evidence that the EU 27 have used this to demonstrate they are playing hard ball.

I'm not sure why anyone would expect them to stay.

(and to Zod)

I agree - seems like a ludicrous position to take up. Just gives fuel to the "project fear" fire.

As an aside, it's quite difficult to actually join any discussion on here as the bickering is fking pathetic.

[James TiT]

Eddie Strohacker said:

You know people can see this right? This embarrassing lower sixth schtick you keep typing out?

What makes you generate all this total meaningless invective?

[Zod]

hyphen said:

Yes, and they can see that when it comes to Goldmans, you are convinced of their integrity without refusing my claims

Put up or shut up.

Sorry, but what claims are you making about Goldman's integrity that you are asking to be refuted?

Just saying generally that Goldman is bad is really not very convincing. Maybe you could watch The Big Short and explain the bad things Goldman did in the movie and how they related to real life.

[Digga]

Zod said:

Just saying generally that Goldman is bad is really not very convincing. Maybe you could watch The Big Short and explain the bad things Goldman did in the movie and how they related to real life.

What, then watch Schindler's list and explain the bad things Genghis Kahn did in that?

[hyphen]

Zod said:

Sorry, but what claims are you making about Goldman's integrity that you are asking to be refuted?

Just saying generally that Goldman is bad is really not very convincing. Maybe you could watch The Big Short and explain the bad things Goldman did in the movie and how they related to real life.

I am not asking for anything, I am pointing out that Eddie is unable to...

The claims are below, not sure why I need to retype... Besides who asked you to butt in

[Zod]

hyphen said:

Zod said:

Sorry, but what claims are you making about Goldman's integrity that you are asking to be refuted?

Just saying generally that Goldman is bad is really not very convincing. Maybe you could watch The Big Short and explain the bad things Goldman did in the movie and how they related to real life.

I am not asking for anything, I am pointing out that Eddie is unable to...

The claims are below, not sure why I need to retype... Besides who asked you to butt in

Below? Where?

Do you know what a forum is, by the way?

[hyphen]

Zod said:

Below? Where?

Do you know what a forum is, by the way?

Sorry my bad. I have my ph setup as new posts first rather than the default of new posts last. An advanced forums user you see

See above!

[Eddie Strohacker]

hyphen said:

I am not asking for anything, I am pointing out that Eddie is unable to...

The claims are below, not sure why I need to retype... Besides who asked you to butt in

Bizarre. You want me to admit Blankfein is a stiff? GS are evil. Sure, why not.

You said he was a joke & chief scumbag. That is by any reckoning, the language of a child & given he's running a major financial outfit & you aren't afaik, patent bks too. But your Brexit ego won't let you quite say it.

[hyphen]

Eddie Strohacker said:

Bizarre. You want me to admit Blankfein is a stiff? GS are evil. Sure, why not.

You said he was a joke & chief scumbag. That is by any reckoning, the language of a child & given he's running a major financial outfit & you aren't afaik, patent bks too. But your Brexit ego won't let you quite say it.

You are well aware that I stated 2 specific examples, defrauding investors and hiding Greek debt.

As they are both true, you have instead attempted to bluster your way and failed.

Quit embarrassing yourself, it is all here in black and white.

[Zod]

Digga said:

Zod said:

Just saying generally that Goldman is bad is really not very convincing. Maybe you could watch The Big Short and explain the bad things Goldman did in the movie and how they related to real life.

What, then watch Schindler's list and explain the bad things Genghis Kahn did in that?

It's a while since I saw Schindler's List.

[Eddie Strohacker]

hyphen said:

Quit embarrassing yourself, it is all here in black and white.

'Kay. Chief scumbag out.

[jjlynn27]

Jockman said:

desolate said:

Just been reading that Davis said that the agencies were part of the negotiation - which I suppose is evidence that the EU 27 have used this to demonstrate they are playing hard ball.

I'm not sure why anyone would expect them to stay.

True, some people do think that it's a good thing that they are leaving.