Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
interestrateripoff

Barclays To Axe 19,000 Jobs Under Revival Plan

Recommended Posts

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/05/08/uk-barclays-restructuring-idUKKBN0DO09Z20140508

Barclays Plc (BARC.L) said it will cut 19,000 jobs in the next three years and set up a "bad bank" of assets to run down as it tries to get a turnaround plan back on track by cutting costs and lifting profitability.

Barclays increased its expected job cuts this year to 14,000, from 12,000 announced in February, with the extra 2,000 jobs going in the investment bank. It said it will cut a further 5,000 jobs in the investment bank by the end of 2016.

The bank said 115 billion pounds of risk-weighted assets would go into the bad bank, including 90 billion pounds of investment bank assets and all of its European retail banking operations, amounting to 16 billion pounds of assets.

I was getting worried over the jobless recovery and then Barclays comes along.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cutting 7k from inv business. What does that suggest?

Tough one.

Machines can make more and are cheaper to run.....anyway less money to invest and the demand for lower fees, because all the money was invested into land and buildings?.....go on tell us. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Err, all of its European retail business will go into the bad bank, risk weighted assets.

So probably not actually assets then.

What about all the other European banks retail assets, I suppose they're OK.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Err, all of its European retail business will go into the bad bank, risk weighted assets.

So probably not actually assets then.

What about all the other European banks retail assets, I suppose they're OK.

surely a "bad" bank will be bankrupt from the outset.

How can a share holder owned firm with Limited Liability be allowed to exist as a bankrupt entity from the off?

Any other firm where the Directors beleive the firm will be in a position to not meet its liabilities has to be closed immediately, otherwise the Directors can be charged with all sorts under the various Companies Acts with things from fraud to wrongful trading, leading to personal asset seizure to prison...or...nothing at all.

Edited by Bloo Loo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I see your 19,000 and raise to 20,000

http://news.sky.com/story/1257455/barclays-20000-job-cuts-in-new-strategy

"Barclays has confirmed around 20,000 job cuts under a new strategy building on its aim to become the 'go-to' bank."

"A further 7,000 positions will go in the investment bank up to 2016 - but 2,000 of those had been previously announced."

tiniest-violin.gif?w=300&h=126

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Machines can make more and are cheaper to run.....anyway less money to invest and the demand for lower fees, because all the money was invested into land and buildings?.....go on tell us. ;)

This. Workers are becoming redundant. Only bosses and consumer fodder and robots in the middle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess these are all the bad mortgages etc. On the surface they look good and of value until you try to get some money out of them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can a share holder owned firm with Limited Liability be allowed to exist as a bankrupt entity from the off?

It's TBTF so therefore backstopped by income tax payers.

Not only do asset wealthy not have to contribute to these support mechanisms - they usually end up benefitting from lower lending rates available to people with assets/wealth, allowing them to leverage existing assets to accumulate more.

The whole banker thing was a distraction - bankers are mostly just income slaves like everyone else but usually earn more obv - however most of the ones making a lot of dosh do in fact work quite hard in my experience and had to sacrifice quite a bit to get there (being away from families during week, late nights, early mornings, working weekends etc.)

It was all a distraction away from asset holders. The problem we have is wealth and asset distribution, and that it is largely untaxed - not the fact that some people have higher incomes than others.

Yes bankers got paid bonuses out of tax income etc. but the amounts were trivial compared to how much of the state is supported by income related taxes vs wealth tax.

All that really happened was it became more difficult for anyone working for an income to accumulate wealth over time - even bankers getting massive taxpayer funded bonuses.

The "owning things that appreciate in value" club keeps getting harder to get in to - and all the income tax payers are running around fighting with each other.

At some point the largest voting demographic will be people who don't own things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A fair chunk of what....25% of non wealth generating over paid middle men still leaves 75% of non wealth generating over paid middlemen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barclays only needs two shares of Apple - two computers can then sell the two shares back and forth for higher and higher prices and Barclays will soon be the wealthiest company in the universe... or something like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Barclays only needs two shares of Apple - two computers can then sell the two shares back and forth for higher and higher prices and Barclays will soon be the wealthiest company in the universe... or something like that.

Barclays only needs two shares of Apple - two computers can then sell the two shares back and forth for higher and higher prices and Barclays will soon be the wealthiest company in the universe... or something like that.

Till one of the computers break down and the other one panic sells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flooding the City with redundant investment banksters will at least force wages and bonuses down to minimum wage. ( :lol:).

Oh sorry, it won't 'cause they're special.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flooding the City with redundant investment banksters will at least force wages and bonuses down to minimum wage. ( :lol:).

Oh sorry, it won't 'cause they're special.

Citing the laws of supply and demand basically makes you a socialist these days.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why should the investment bankers worry....they will get their redundancy and will easily get a job elsewhere......that is what they always keep threatening to justify their big bonuses, don't pay or will leave, maybe now is their big opportunity. ;)

Edited by winkie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   210 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

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.