Icesave/Kaupthing - is Martin to blame?

Cloudane

I feel like such an anorak, but is there an archive or youtube video of the C4 interview?

mariegriffiths

31May2008 wrote: »

Kaupthing, icesave and the icelandic economy itself were quantifiably unstable weeks ago.

Why didn't Martin post warnings about this on the site?

If the answer is 'to prevent a run on the bank' - since when did Martin advocate loyalty to banks!?

I suspect he has had lawyers from the banks breathing down his neck stopping him from giving this advice. Claiming he would be causing a run on the bank.

pumpndump

posh*spice wrote: »

Where sheep come into I don't know. Unless it's the sheep who believe if they all huddle together on the deck of the Titanic that somehow that won't make the ship go down.....is that the band I hear...

The few "sensible" heads on this board as you put it just drowned out any information of any real value on this board.

I am not one of the ones who took money out of the Icelandic banks, because I had no money in them in the first place.

But I did read through the postings in the run-up to Ice-Save going ttitts up. And I was struck by the reactions of those who had money in KE and IceSave and intended to keep it there no matter what. They were in hysterics. Their postings were full of ire. It was as though they subconsciously knew that their banks were in deep doodoo, and yet...

As Donald J Trump suggests, read Carl Gustav Jung.

Captain_Mainwaring_2

31May2008 wrote: »

Kaupthing, icesave and the icelandic economy itself were quantifiably unstable weeks ago.

Why didn't Martin post warnings about this on the site?

If the answer is 'to prevent a run on the bank' - since when did Martin advocate loyalty to banks!?

Martin doesn't advocate loyalty to anything he sell his mum for the cost of half a cooked bat.

There are times when you need to have loyalty - for example I pay fees , yes, you heard right, I pay fees for running my current account because the service I receive is outstanding. OK, I don't have loans as such, but all this crap of claiming back fees and not honouring your debts through a "loophole", (rat-hole more like) .

Do you people really thinks Lewis goes out there assessing banks on his own and discovering ways to avoid your debts? He has a man to do that. He has been lucky, he found a couple of loopholes which he exploited and has floated his little empire on the back of a recession. You will note that our recession is contemporaneous with Mr Lewis getting people to rip the !!!! out of the banks and credit card companies.

He and his ilk probably are more to blame for our recession than we might believe.

wadeall

Martin has given alot of sensible and valuable advice, but though he clearly identified the key issue: That the first GBP16k of savings with Icesave were covered by the Icelandic depositor protection scheme NOT the UK scheme, he failed to correctly assess the risk this imposed on depositors. The issue being that with such a tiny population and way over levereged banks, if one of the major banks went bust, this would severely undermine the creditworthiness of the whole Icelandic state. This leaves a GBP16,000 hole in the deposit protection offered on Icesave. The UK Government may conclude that it is politically impossible to let the 300,000 people - maybe 500,000 voters including family members who stand to potentially lose out if as I suspect, the Icelanders cannot afford to pay up down and pay up. Let's remember that Iceland's total population is just 300,000. Do you really expect the Icelandic government to hand over - effectively from its own taxpayers around GBP10,000 per man, woman and child in Iceland to UK savers? if Brown doesn't pay up on the GBP16000 Icelandic hole, we may find that people are rather less forgiving of this mistake than they currently are

popmacca

benjdr wrote: »

You will note the disclaimer:

This website is based on journalistic research. It does not constitute financial advice. Any information should be considered in regard to specific circumstances. All tips are followed at your own risk and should be followed up with your own research

How come "disclaimers" are ok for Martin in the "small print" but when banks state clearly "if an item presents for payment & there are insufficient funds in your accout to cover the transaction you will be charged a fee of £25/£30" that's totally outragous??:rolleyes:

Pots.......kettles anyone?

chattycathyuk

you know what makes me sick about some people, is there up for it if when theres something in it for them!

Martin isnt god! hes trying to make this world a better place, took time out to help you and some of you are pulling him down because it went tits up!you know what make your own decisions, if you take someones advice well its a gamble. least this guy tryed to help, if you only take well dont expected to get anything back.

makes me mad!:mad:

noones fault its called greedy! next time why dont you pay for advice and take it out on them! no you wouldnt do that might cost you!

take take take give nothing back!

popmacca

The downside is that "normal" worthy account holders will pay the price for all of these reclaiming tactics.

Your so correct ..... people you took a little time to ensure their accounts didn't go unath overdrawn & used their accounts responsibly will end up paying more.

Everyone seems to forget that when credit card companies were forced to reduce their late payment fees to £12 the mojority then imediatly increased their interest rates to cover the shortfall........ that was great wasn't it, penalise the majority so the selfish minority who couldn't be bothered to ensure their payments got there in time aren't too put out :rolleyes:

chattycathyuk

Captain_Mainwaring wrote: »

Martin doesn't advocate loyalty to anything he sell his mum for the cost of half a cooked bat.

There are times when you need to have loyalty - for example I pay fees , yes, you heard right, I pay fees for running my current account because the service I receive is outstanding. OK, I don't have loans as such, but all this crap of claiming back fees and not honouring your debts through a "loophole", (rat-hole more like) .

Do you people really thinks Lewis goes out there assessing banks on his own and discovering ways to avoid your debts? He has a man to do that. He has been lucky, he found a couple of loopholes which he exploited and has floated his little empire on the back of a recession. You will note that our recession is contemporaneous with Mr Lewis getting people to rip the !!!! out of the banks and credit card companies.

He and his ilk probably are more to blame for our recession than we might believe.

get a life!

popmacca

mariegriffiths wrote: »

I suspect he has had lawyers from the banks breathing down his neck stopping him from giving this advice. Claiming he would be causing a run on the bank.

Errrrrrr... that would mean he could only give "positive" advice then wouldn't it??

Which would then mean any of his advice wouldn't be worth a carrot so why would anyone bother listening to him at all????;)