Breaking News: Ing

cwcw

baby_boomer wrote: »

At least if the Dutch government refuse to cough up there is somewhere to go - The European Court of Justice - unlike in the case of Iceland.

I understand that since Iceland is in the EEA it must comply with the EU laws in any case? Besides, I think Darling would find it a little harder to bully Holland than Iceland to get money back.

baby_boomer

justaquickie wrote: »

The BBC have already referred to is as "The ING rescue deal" in their article. How responsible is that?!

Is that another article or blog? I can't find the phrase in the OP's link above.

poppy10 wrote: »

I bet you were the one of the ones screaming that Icesave was safe right to the end.

Actually I was one of the ones being insulted back in June for saying it might not be! The atmosphere was unpleasantly herd like / ostrich like.

meanmachine_2

Oh come now, Poppy, while I agree that, had I panicked earlier I wouldn't have lost my Icesave money (sorry, had it "frozen"), I *do* think ING is a different type of institution.

Firstly, it's backed by the Netherlands, a country with vastly more resources (and 16 million more people) than Iceland.

Holland is part of the EU, so won't be allowed to go "bankrupt", unlike Iceland.

Thirdly, while 10bn sounds alot, ING as a whole has one TRILLION in assets, so it's still just a drop in the ocean.

Fourthly, ING has an A rating from Standard and Poor. Iceland's banks didn't.

cwcw

opinions4u wrote: »

Do you not understand that panic mongering could actually bring down a decent bank?

The truth is that wholesale funding has ceased up. This on its own could bring banks down, so governments around the world are ensuring that they are well capitalised (to deal with potential losses, look more appealing to wholesale funders and also deal with significant levels of withdrawals, should that occur).

The problems are across the sector and across the world.

Singling out one bank individually as "in trouble", when the truth is that they are being strengthened, could be precisely what tips a solid bank over the edge as people panic and withdraw their savings beyond the tolerance of their reserves.

Highlight the ING story by all accounts. But your initial headline was scaremongering, unneccessary and, while perhaps not deliberately so, irresponsible.

The original title was "ING in trouble now". The keyword "now" implies that there are already other banks in trouble and now ING has joined then. That doesn't "single it out" at all. And any bank needing a loan as big as 10 billion euros is clearly in trouble.

mrposhman

cwcw wrote: »

A 500 million euro loss in a single quarter is not to be sniffed at. I hope we don't see a repeat of Icesave but in these times, who knows? People need to know what's happening.

It depends, is this profit from operations or after exceptional items??

If its after exceptionals and this is all the writedowns they require then that would suggest they aren't in a bad position.

Take for example our banks who reportedly have BILLIONS OF £'s to writedown.

Joe65_2

baby_boomer wrote: »

At least if the Dutch government refuse to cough up there is somewhere to go - The European Court of Justice - unlike in the case of Iceland.

It shouldn't come to that,
with the Netherland's GDP around.$750 bn. compared to Iceland's c.$20 bn.

Count_Dante

'Bush Calls for Panic'

'WASHINGTON—In a nationally televised address to the American people Wednesday night, President Bush called upon every man, woman, and child to spiral uncontrollably downward into complete and utter panic.'

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/bush_calls_for_panic

dillydilly

well, managed to get beyond the Withdrawal page at last... probably my fault all along - I changed the withdrawal date to Wednesday rather than tomorrow and it went through. Which suggests the date needed is the date expected to arrive in the recipient account - odd, I'm sure other accounts ask for the date you want it to leave this account... anyway, I shall now keep my fingers crossed for Wednesday - I know, I know its all covered by various security schemes but with £20k locked up in Icesave I've got to get some cash from somewhere...

baby_boomer

Joe65 wrote: »

It shouldn't come to that,
with the Netherland's GDP around.$750 bn. compared to Iceland's c.$20 bn.

Quite.

cwcw wrote: »

I understand that since Iceland is in the EEA it must comply with the EU laws in any case? Besides, I think Darling would find it a little harder to bully Holland than Iceland to get money back.

Holland is in the EU. There wouldn't be any need to bully. It would be a matter for the European Court of Justice - except it wouldn't come to that.

Let's not forget that Kaupthing Savers are with ING courtesy of the UK Prime Minister's decision. Super Gordon isn't going to them down - especially with the daft £50K+ precendent he established at IceSave. And he's hardly going to distinguish between ING/ex-Kaupthing savers were they in trouble.

Herald Tribune - E10bn lifeline to ING

"ING said the bailout would bring its core Tier 1 ratio, a measure of capital strength, to about 8 percent. It had said Friday that the ratio was 6.5 percent."

Not excessive, even after the lift.

FT Blog

"Yesterday we saw UBS and Credit Suisse use government bailouts to help raise their Tier 1 capital, banks’ stress-test safety cushion, to 11.5 per cent and 13.7 per cent respectively. UK banks, with at least £37bn of HM Treasury money behind them, are also raising Tier 1 ratios to between 11.3 per cent and 12.7 per cent, according to previous estimates by JP Morgan. In a note this morning, analysts at JP Morgan said:
… we expect regulators in Europe to push for higher capitalization ratios in banks, to avoid banks needing to delever the asset side of the balance sheet too much, in an attempt to mitigate the impact of a credit crunch on the real economy. Hence, we expect it is just a matter of time to see capital raisings with government support being announced...."
Required capital ratios are not all the same - it depends on the risk element of the banks' business.

poppy10_2

Dutch government will be buying non-voting shares, but will apparently have two members on the board of ING.

The government have vetoed the paying of any executive bonuses by ING this year.

ING will not be paying a dividend this year (expect their stock to plummet on Monday)

The stock injection will not dilute current shareholdings

The government will hold on to its stake until the financial crisis has passed. ING can buy back the shares from the government at 150% of the purchase price.