Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
EssexFTB

Who Will Be Nationalised First?

Recommended Posts

Okay, We have RBS who are in trouble, already 70% Nationalised, shares att 11.5p (dont i just know it)

We have Lloyds Banking group, 48% Nationalised and shares round about 50p

And lastly Barclays, 0% Nationalised but have the UAE twisting their arm behind their back. shares at 50p also!!

Roll up, who is it to be?

At the start of the week i thought RBS were done for, but Barclays get 10 out of 10 for their spectacular fall (still falling) from grace, they are in a very vulnerable position now, on par with RBS at least!

Iam afraid i'am going for full nationalisation of RBS

Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I put a punt on them surviving. I bought RBS, lloyds, Barclays and HSBC. Although and you won't like me saying this I got about a third of the RBS shares you did at 1/12 of the price.

I think its still very possible they will all survive. If any fail I think it will be RBS, lloyds, Barclays in that order.

And over the next 5 years I hope to make very good money if 3 survive. Great if they all do.

Sentiment is horrific at the moment, but, and I know this really doesn't mean much, but the government has effectively staked their credibility on not nationalising the banks.

yes, yes, I know

Edited by KingBingo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of em'.... they'll just keeping bailing, hoping, and letting them limp along! If they nationalise any of these, the national debt would hit many 100s of % more that what it already is.

Don't forget the General Election is just round the corner now ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sentiment is horrific at the moment, but, and I know this really doesn't mean much, but the government has effectively staked their credibility on not nationalising the banks.

yes, yes, I know

How so?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I put a punt on them surviving. I bought RBS, lloyds, Barclays and HSBC. Although and you won't like me saying this I got about a third of the RBS shares you did at 1/12 of the price.

I think its still very possible they will all survive. If any fail I think it will be RBS, lloyds, Barclays in that order.

And over the next 5 years I hope to make very good money if 3 survive. Great if they all do.

Sentiment is horrific at the moment, but, and I know this really doesn't mean much, but the government has effectively staked their credibility on not nationalising the banks.

yes, yes, I know

Well, I've just bought a few Barclays' shares. Will see how it goes next 2 weeks, whether they'll survive or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big banks have potential foreign liabilities which could consume the UKs £60billion of foreign and gold reserves in hours if not minutes.

Only a government which was utterly inept, deluded and irrational would consider nationalising them.

Oh bogger.

Edited by Freeholder

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How does a 'bad bank' scenario fit into this?

For example, could the government - in dire straights - split RBS into two. A 'good' bank with UK customer deposits, UK mortgaes and a bad bank with the dodgy derivatives, etc. Nationalise the good bank, keeping the branch network, etc and leaving the bad bank to fold, or find someone daft enough to buy some of it's assets.

This would of course destroy the reputation of the UK as banking centre, but I fear that is happening already.

Or am I being a simpleton.

Edited by redalert

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why? do you think Spain will be nationalising B&B?

Our govt cleverly split it didn't they into the good assets and the bad, they sold the good assets to the Spanish and the UK taxpayer kept the crap worthless shit.

Somewhere I think someone screwed this idea up a bit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the Government will continue to put more and more money in, but if it reaches the stage (and it could well do) where it can no longer afford to do so or it looks like it won't be able to afford to do so, then they'll let it go to the wall.

This is the dilemma, isn't it.

The threat of nationalisation is hitting the share price of all the banks. Better for Government to say, you'd imagine, that there will be no nationalisation. Then shareholders will buy in again.

Except that, no one has confidence in the banks and the only confidence exists with the Gov being a final, potential backer.

At least one of these banks has to go the wall, but no one knows which one. Should the Gov come clean about who will be hung out to dry?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Our govt cleverly split it didn't they into the good assets and the bad, they sold the good assets to the Spanish and the UK taxpayer kept the crap worthless shit.

I'd be interested to find out the details of that deal. Santander must have paid something substantial for the 'good assets'. What was it? Anyone?

Letting Bill&Benley go bust would hardly have brought the nation to its knees. I never understood that bail out and still don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking interesting. I just took a very small punt on Lloyds, mostly on the grounds that I expect them to rise when their next results beat market expectations 'cos of the number of people overpaying all those HBOS mortgages ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Once you have Nationalisation, firstly the debt would go on the government's balance sheet as has been said by someone earlier but also, more importantly, it then rules out the option of a default by RBS.... because to do so whilst in the government's hands would be considered a government default.

Is that actually correct ?. The government can take over of any company merely by buying enough shares to become the biggest equity holder (a situation that already exists with RBS). This would allow it to appoint the board of directors thus giving it effective control. This does not means it is any more liable for all the company's debts than any private investor that has a dominant shareholding. As the banks are limited companies if the business goes under the liability in law is the equity stake not the entire debts of the business. In fact taking an equity stake in the business is probably a far more sensible course for the government than writing insurance against the debt as Brown has proposed. That strategy does leave the taxpayer open to paying out for any defaults by borrowers.

By the way a lot of figures are bandied about about banks potential liabilities and debts which in reality relate to potential asset write downs due to poor lending. The banks true liabilities are the money it owes to depositors, bond holders and others from whom they have borrowed. There is a tendency for media stories to confuse and merge the two sides of the balance sheet.

Edited by up2nogood

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 284 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.