LinkBack URL
About LinkBacksAnd all the foreign owned banks.Originally Posted by jfk2008
And all the foreign owned banks.
The Mahon Tribunal found Olivia Mitchell to have received an inappropriate payment from Frank Dunlop at the time of the 1992 Election. F.G. Gael has taken no action against her.
Can't see the likes of PTSB falling on its' sword when it was not a major offender.
Look at Britain. Their Nationwide Building Society refused to demutualize, fought off the carpetbaggers, and are currently one of the, if not the most, well-placed lenders in the current situation. The demutualized former building societies are under severe pressure. I wouldn' have thought demutualization would be in anyone's interests, except the quick-profit-driven carpetbaggers.
That's what I thought. So why's it being mooted that AIB and BoI could be the only one's left operating (i presume out of all those that joined the guarantee scheme?)
“A healthy social life is found only, when in the mirror of each soul the whole community finds its reflection, and when in the whole community the virtue of each one is living”
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Depending on who you believe their is seriously bad juju surrounding AIB and/or BOI too. What odds on them both going and something really drastic being worked out. Like new banks altogether?
Liquidate labour, liquidate stocks, liquidate the farmers, liquidate real estate.
Not if the entity they were merging with was also a mutual. THink rabobank is a mutual and they've been linked with them a number of times. Also current CEO has direct links to Rabo if memory serves me correctly.
Anyway, regardless of what they do a vote would have to be put to the members.
(although once the board has decided on a course of action to support that is likely what will carry as the chairman wielding all the proxy votes tends to pretty much have the biggest say)
"Truth, in the matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived" - Oscar Wilde
Lenihan can't force the banks to merge because of property constitutional rights. But he could twist arms by nationalising one of the major ones at their present low market capitalisations,through a takeover bid. With the implicit backing of the government for bank equity capital and solvency,the banking market share of a nationalised bank would rocket at the expense of the rest.
The best solution is for the government to guarantee a good return on investment on new bank share issues for say seven years. That gives plenty of time for the government to deal with its deficits and the banks to sort out their problem loans. As a condition of the guarantee, the government should employ property consultants to work with external auditors to ensure that banks are estimating the true value of property loans. It is important that bad loans be written down to prevent throwing good money after bad to zombie developers and zombie banks and to free up capital for ordinary decent businesses.
Property constitutional rights? Forget them. Without government backing - because noone else will - they might all fail, sooner rather than later.
As for the "true value of property loans" - there isn't one, in the current environment. That's the problem. Whether it's a "money-good" mortgage, or a daft spec loan on the likes of Sean Dunne's Ballsbridge property, there's no market for either. Writing down bad loans would send at least two banks to the wall. Why should the taxpayer have to pay one cent for these, either by buying shares in them, or by subsidising AIB/BofI to take them over?
Reply With Quote