caparo Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 For a traded title, that's the crucial bit. And guess what...while the electorate may have whinged about a £1m bonus, and the politicians caved in to same for a quick good soundbite, this 'saved' £1m is likely to cost the electorate a fair number of billions over time (how much do you think traders advising against an RBS buy, in the UK and further afield, affect a share price in the short and medium term?) The politicians may dictate to majority state-owned bankers, but can't dictate to the trading floors, particularly elsewhere on the planet. As clear a case of not seeing the forest for the tree, or cutting one's nose to spite one's face, as I've ever seen. It is indeed a strange affair. The last government appointed heston to turn around a bank that posted losses of £28 billion just a couple of years ago. Presumably at the time they agreed his remuneration package which tempted him to give up his previous highly paid position to move to R.B.S. So a couple of years down the line the bank is actually declaring a profit and ministers are whining about his pay. Admittedly he does have an obscene pay level, but thats the obscene pay level he was offered in order to get him to take the job. He says he only turned down his bonus in order that a dispute might not further damage the bank. But if he is now a disgruntled executive who can find employment on this scale elsewhere thelast few days have presumably made his departure more likely. Saving a million could easily cost us several billion in the long run. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T 42 Posted February 11, 2012 Author Share Posted February 11, 2012 Nice one with the "financial advice" strawman. Fancy responding to any of the questions I've asked you or do you now accept that your OP was nonsense? Oh, and by the way, that's actually 2 types of people with a subset thrown in. I realise that you know everything about investments so it won't come as a shock that RBS is closing its investment bank arm. This is really great news for the taxpayer because around 200 investment bankers are moving to other financial institutions saving us almost £100 million in bonus payments. On the downside of course we won't benefit from the £33 billion RSBs investment bank has contributed over the past 4 years, but thats a small price to pay. I nearly forgot. Steve Williams has also announced that he is moving on and taking up a position with "an asian rival". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 I realise that you know everything about investments so it won't come as a shock that RBS is closing its investment bank arm. This is really great news for the taxpayer because around 200 investment bankers are moving to other financial institutions saving us almost £100 million in bonus payments. On the downside of course we won't benefit from the £33 billion RSBs investment bank has contributed over the past 4 years, but thats a small price to pay. I nearly forgot. Steve Williams has also announced that he is moving on and taking up a position with "an asian rival". Still not answering the question then? That's fine - I know you would have if you had an answer. You may wish to stop suggesting I think I know everything, since I've made it clear I don't (think that) on a few posts on this thread, though I am mildly flattered that you think I'm here for anything more than poking a bit of fun at an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
T 42 Posted February 11, 2012 Author Share Posted February 11, 2012 Still not answering the question then? That's fine - I know you would have if you had an answer. You may wish to stop suggesting I think I know everything, since I've made it clear I don't (think that) on a few posts on this thread, though I am mildly flattered that you think I'm here for anything more than poking a bit of fun at an idiot. There is only one person on here looking like an idiot and that is you. The fact you haven't the intelligence to grasp that is merely confirmation. And to answer your question. Yes I did notice the share price dropped by 3% yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 There is only one person on here looking like an idiot and that is you. The fact you haven't the intelligence to grasp that is merely confirmation. Oh mercy me; I've gone and picked a fight with Oscar Wilde. And to answer your question. Yes I did notice the share price dropped by 3% yesterday. Oh no! That's another 480 million we've lost! Add that to the 600 million we lost in your OP and we're well over a BILLION down... Country gone to the dogs... you couldn't MAKE it up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anywebsite Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 Oh no! That's another 480 million we've lost! Add that to the 600 million we lost in your OP and we're well over a BILLION down... Country gone to the dogs... you couldn't MAKE it up. As you know a lot of things can affect the share price. Some things the government has control over, others they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted February 11, 2012 Share Posted February 11, 2012 As you know a lot of things can affect the share price. Some things the government has control over, others they don't. Hi again AWS. I agree, fully, with your post. What does it have to do with the post of mine you quoted, though? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 In response to anywebsite kindly trying to help me understand the workings of the stock market and, in particular, potential consequences of the Hester bonus affair by using a football based analogy thus: I'll try to explain it in terms you can understand... Wayne Rooney gets paid £250,000 a week salary from Man U. That's about £2,000 a minute, for kicking a ball around. He clearly doesn't deserve all that money, nobody does. If there was any suggestion of imposing wage caps on English footballers he'd be off to Real Madrid in about 10 seconds, the premier league would become league one standard. If the wage cap was just for Man U & all the other teams could continue paying whatever they wanted, what do you think that'd do to Man U's ability to attract & keep the top players? How would their share price react? I responded: I think, like you, that their share price would plummet and they wouldn't be able to attract and keep the top players, though it could be argued (not by me ...[snip little dig at another poster] ... ) that other clubs may see this as an opportunity to lower their wages in line with the laudable stance taken by the the Manchester trailblazers. It now looks like my suggestion wasn't as far fetched as I thought when I wrote it: FT Article. "From reducing bonus pools to capping the amount of cash paid out and clawing back past incentive awards, investment banks are taking what many analysts say is a long overdue look at how the sector’s high pay levels are impeding profit growth." The article doesn't suggest a direct link from the Hester decision to the actions described above and neither do I but one can't help wonder, given the previous "reduce bonuses - lose the best staff" mantra, if it has allowed them to take action they previously felt they couldn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caparo Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 http://www.businessweek.com/news/2012-02-25/hsbc-profit-may-rise-with-standard-chartered-on-asia-growth.html Feb. 24 (Bloomberg) -- HSBC Holdings Plc and Standard Chartered Plc, Britain’s two best-performing bank stocks last year, may say full-year profit rose as growth in Asia eclipsed the stagnating U.K. economy. HSBC may next week say earnings climbed 24 percent to $16.3 billion from the year-earlier period, helped by an accounting gain on the revaluation of its own debt, according to the median estimate of 19 analysts surveyed by Bloomberg. Net income at Standard Chartered will probably climb 9 percent to $4.73 billion, according to the median estimate of 17 analysts. It seems that banks that don't suffer from state interference are doing rather well. I note Steven Hester is saying that RBS is in danger of becoming banking's British Leyland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lockjaw Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 It seems that banks that don't suffer from state interference are doing rather well. Fair point. Could it not, though, also be presented as: "It seems that banks that didn't need bailing out a few years ago are still doing better than those that did"? [Disclaimer: I hold HSBC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.