RBS handing out bonuses

[Adrian W]

Parrot of Doom said:

g4ry13 said:

No longer than about 6 months after taking the tax payers money to prop up the bank in the financial turmoil, RBS is now dishing out some rather large bonuses to their employees.

It seems they haven't been approved yet by the authorities to hand out the bonuses but bets are on they're going to pull a fast one and make some nice money. Read about it here

Just nice to see the poor tax payers propping up the banks and then getting chased for their mortgages by the banks, losing their homes, and being cut off benefits by the state. If these bonuses get through it'll be an utter shambles.

Edited by g4ry13 on Sunday 18th October 00:42

So maybe you'd rather see the banks renege on contracts with their employees, the banks then being sued, and having to pay out, which would cost you, as a shareholder, more?

Yes, I would like to see the banks renege on contracts to employees, the Uk goverments bailed them out, yet they are reneging on companies by withdrawing facilities every day, they are using some very dubious tactics that put the companies in a position where the break bank covenants and then pull the plug.

The worst thing this goverment ever did was prop the thieving scum up.

[Dupont666]

Adrian W said:

Parrot of Doom said:

g4ry13 said:

No longer than about 6 months after taking the tax payers money to prop up the bank in the financial turmoil, RBS is now dishing out some rather large bonuses to their employees.

It seems they haven't been approved yet by the authorities to hand out the bonuses but bets are on they're going to pull a fast one and make some nice money. Read about it here

Just nice to see the poor tax payers propping up the banks and then getting chased for their mortgages by the banks, losing their homes, and being cut off benefits by the state. If these bonuses get through it'll be an utter shambles.

Edited by g4ry13 on Sunday 18th October 00:42

So maybe you'd rather see the banks renege on contracts with their employees, the banks then being sued, and having to pay out, which would cost you, as a shareholder, more?

Yes, I would like to see the banks renege on contracts to employees, the Uk goverments bailed them out, yet they are reneging on companies by withdrawing facilities every day, they are using some very dubious tactics that put the companies in a position where the break bank covenants and then pull the plug.

The worst thing this goverment ever did was prop the thieving scum up.

Who did they steal off in your opinion?

Im interested?

[ineedagallardo]

Nobody seems to have answered the question;

If they've made so much money they can afford £4 billion bonuses, Why haven't ehy paid back any of the money given to them by the Goverment?

[Marf]

ineedagallardo said:

Nobody seems to have answered the question;

If they've made so much money they can afford £4 billion bonuses, Why haven't ehy paid back any of the money given to them by the Goverment?

Because the government didn't lend them anything

[ineedagallardo]

Marf said:

ineedagallardo said:

Nobody seems to have answered the question;

If they've made so much money they can afford £4 billion bonuses, Why haven't ehy paid back any of the money given to them by the Goverment?

Because the government didn't lend them anything

Sorry they bailed them out - by effectivly investing in them.

So surely the money should be paid back at some point or at least dividends paid on the money invested?

[rocksteadyeddie]

Marf said:

ineedagallardo said:

Nobody seems to have answered the question;

If they've made so much money they can afford £4 billion bonuses, Why haven't ehy paid back any of the money given to them by the Goverment?

Because the government didn't lend them anything

The government effectively bought a large stake in RBS. We, the taxpayers, continue to own that stake (c.70%) and are therefore entitled to 70% of the profits from 2009, and every year that we continue to hold onto that stake. The money did not dissapear into thin air.

I suspect that in the fullness of time the taxpayer will turn a significant profit on the deal. For the moment though we are losing money - the value of the investment is less than we paid for it.

HTH

[Marf]

ineedagallardo said:

Marf said:

ineedagallardo said:

Nobody seems to have answered the question;

If they've made so much money they can afford £4 billion bonuses, Why haven't ehy paid back any of the money given to them by the Goverment?

Because the government didn't lend them anything

Sorry they bailed them out - by effectivly investing in them.

So surely the money should be paid back at some point or at least dividends paid on the money invested?

The money will be "paid back" once the government entity setup to bail them out sells the shares issued to them. At the moment if the government sells their shares, they would do so at a loss.

As far as I am aware no dividend has been paid since June 2008.

[Marf]

rocksteadyeddie said:

I suspect that in the fullness of time the taxpayer will turn a significant profit on the deal.

ditto, but until that happens it will be de riguer to bash the bankers.

rocksteadyeddie said:

We, the taxpayers, continue to own that stake (c.70%) and are therefore entitled to 70% of the profits from 2009

No, we wouldnt be, just like no other shareholder in a public company is directly entitled to a share of the net profits of a company in any other form than dividends.

Edited by Marf on Monday 19th October 16:54

[ineedagallardo]

Marf said:

rocksteadyeddie said:

I suspect that in the fullness of time the taxpayer will turn a significant profit on the deal.

ditto, but until that happens it will be de riguer to bash the bankers.

rocksteadyeddie said:

We, the taxpayers, continue to own that stake (c.70%) and are therefore entitled to 70% of the profits from 2009

No, we wouldnt be, just like no other shareholder in a public company is directly entitled to a share of the net profits of a company in any other form than dividends.

Edited by Marf on Monday 19th October 16:54

So im correct in thinking that the way this bailout happened was in the form of the goverment purchasing shares?

If so how much did we pay per share?

[Marf]

ineedagallardo said:

Marf said:

rocksteadyeddie said:

I suspect that in the fullness of time the taxpayer will turn a significant profit on the deal.

ditto, but until that happens it will be de riguer to bash the bankers.

rocksteadyeddie said:

We, the taxpayers, continue to own that stake (c.70%) and are therefore entitled to 70% of the profits from 2009

No, we wouldnt be, just like no other shareholder in a public company is directly entitled to a share of the net profits of a company in any other form than dividends.

Edited by Marf on Monday 19th October 16:54

So im correct in thinking that the way this bailout happened was in the form of the goverment purchasing shares?

If so how much did we pay per share?

Thats right, RBS issued shares to the government which now total c.70% of their total share capital. The gov't paid 65.5p per share, so until they hit that level, they will not have broken even on the investment.

[rocksteadyeddie]

Marf said:

No, we wouldnt be, just like no other shareholder in a public company is directly entitled to a share of the net profits of a company in any other form than dividends.

The key word is directly but we may be splitting hairs here.

Whether those profits are redistributed to shareholders (through a dividend) or retained / reinvested in the business (which would presumably be reflected in the share price) that value is still attributable to us as shareholders. Of course as majority shareholders we can theoretically tell management what to do.

I'm boring myself now so I assume everyone else is half asleep!

[rocksteadyeddie]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

[Dupont666]

If I remember rightly RBS is now looking at flogging all Asia assets to pay some of the money back... (big mistake)

And its looking at the breaking up of ABN (I think) that it purchased in 2008 with santandar amongst others... but then something went wrong there.

I should look it up but cant be bothered

[Marf]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

This raises an interesting question. Should the government sell of at say 80p? Or hold out for more. Looking at the historical share price of RBS there is potentially a much much bigger upside if we held on.

[ineedagallardo]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Judging by winkies historicaly bad timing im suprised he didn't sell earlier in the year when they were @ 9p

[rocksteadyeddie]

Marf said:

This raises an interesting question. Should the government sell of at say 80p? Or hold out for more. Looking at the historical share price of RBS there is potentially a much much bigger upside if we held on.

Indeed. If it is politically motivated then any price above the average (whatever that is) will do. Who knows where 'fair value' is? My guess would be somewhere between 120-180p a share (nice tight range huh?)

A more difficult question is 'Who is a buyer of 70% of RBS?'. There are very few banks in the world who could do this trade, and fewer who are in the financial shape to do so. I would have thought a more likely ourcome is to sell 20% or more to AN Other bank - reducing the Govt below majority shareholding - and drip the rest out over time. Paradoxically the market knowing that the Government is a willing seller probably puts a cap on the share price!

[John MacK]

rocksteadyeddie said:

October 7th 2009 The FT said:

Shares in RBS closed yesterday at 49.65p, compared with the 50.5p average price at which the government acquired its 70 per cent stake

Have to say I thought it was more like 70p

The government paid 60+ p to take a 50+% stake and then a further offer at 37(ish)p to take them up to 70+% stake.

Values of 15bn and 5bn respectively.


Yes I realise they never actually handed over cash for the shares, blah, blah etc.

[HarryW]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I often wonder if requisite qualification for a Labour government front bencher is that they once run the bar and petty cash in their local labour and or working mans club

[ineedagallardo]

I dont even think they have the buisness sense to manage that.

[Bing o]

I still fail to see how an ex solicitor can end up in charge of our economy...