RBS about to implode?

chambta

swiss69 wrote: »

Buying these shares at £2.50 wasn't one of my better decisions:rolleyes: Thank god it was only £1500.

I feel for the shop floor staff who have no input whatsover into these ludicrous decisions that have ultimately cost them thousands of pounds. Having worked for a bank I know that there are staff at all levels who own thousands of shares and were relying (albeit naively) on these shares to help fund their retirement. It was seen as the main perk of working in a high pressure enviroment (together with pension) which when sat on the counter pays no more than a checkout operator at tesco.

No doubt the sales managers will still be waiting for their end of day text messages from the salesforce......and the staff will have to be in 15 minutes before they get paid for the morning huddle!

Anyone at Director level upwards should have been sacked for this shambles. Its the equivalent of Chelsea going from top of the premier league to relegation to the vauxhall conference in 4 seasons! Would the Chelsea manager still be in a job??

I'm grateful I only paid £30pm into my 3 year share save. In hindsight I wish the October shareprice had been lower and I'd have took my cash back out rather than see my £1080 disappear in the misguided expectation they'd rise.

Nice as a holiday/hi-fi etc would have been I can afford to lose the money. Many staff have paid in a hell of a lot more and some as you rightly say have held onto vast numbers of shares as a 'safe bet' retirement pot.

How very wrong they've been and they should be very angry at the negligence of Goodwin et al.

Snooze

Cleaver wrote: »

If everyone went out tomorrow and withdrew their money and put it under their matress it would be pretty much be worthless. I can't tell you fully why this is, but I'm sure someone more intelligent will be along in a minute to tell you why.

Umm no. It won't be any more "worthless" under your mattress than it would be sitting in a no-interest earning bank account. A £20 note under your mattress is worth exactly the same as £20 showing on your bank statement, the only difference being that the £20 under your mattress will always be there should you ever need it.

Rob

tmm_aka_tracy

The only real hope would be to find a bank or building society that has zero exposure to any other part of the financial markets and is completely self sufficient, question is does one exist?[/quote]

My daughter works for Manchester Building Society and so far as I know, they have stuck mainly to the old fashioned way of lending what has been deposited. My DD is moaning like mad that every time the interest rates are cut, she has to send out 1500 letters (she works in the post room the little love - she's only 17).

Might this be a good place to open an account????

WTF?_2

Snooze wrote: »

Umm no. It won't be any more "worthless" under your mattress than it would be sitting in a no-interest earning bank account. A £20 note under your mattress is worth exactly the same as £20 showing on your bank statement, the only difference being that the £20 under your mattress will always be there should you ever need it.

Rob

Yes, bears repeating that cash in the bank merely represents cash owed to you by the bank. If the bank goes bust or can't pay, welcome to a world of worry as you hope the govt compensation scheme is going to cough up.

Physical legal tender isn't going to end up as liquidated debt.


If we really are in for deflation, it makes no sense whatsoever to keep your cash in a zero-paying account at a bank that could go bust.

If we get strong inflation, then holding large amounts of physical cash is pretty stupid as it loses value and there's no interest from the bank to compensate. Actually, better to have the cash in hard assets or stocks and out of cash altogether but that's another topic.

Cleaver

Snooze wrote: »

Umm no. It won't be any more "worthless" under your mattress than it would be sitting in a no-interest earning bank account. A £20 note under your mattress is worth exactly the same as £20 showing on your bank statement, the only difference being that the £20 under your mattress will always be there should you ever need it.

Rob

But surely if everyone withdrew all of their money from banks in a short period of time, the whole financial sector, and therefore everything else, would collapse. You'd have nothing to spend your money on, therefore it'd become useless.

I have no idea if the above is correct, I've just made it up. Sounds good in theory though. I call it 'Reverse Economic Fiscal Spiralling'.

Grade_A_Reject

Mr_Matey wrote: »

You are one angry, angry man.

What makes you think that?

alared

RBS really does deserve to go to the wall.
It lent two and a half BILLION pounds to some Russian oil tycoon, who`s now defaulted on the loan,so RBS just wrote the sum off.:T :T

At the same time if you dare miss one measily mortgage payment, this bunch of idiots will take you to the cleaners and throw you out of your property.:mad: :mad::mad:

Why aren`t heads rolling

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/4286459/Russian-tycoon-had-RBS-loan-of-2.5bn-written-off.html

Snooze

Cleaver wrote: »

But surely if everyone withdrew all of their money from banks in a short period of time, the whole financial sector, and therefore everything else, would collapse.

Quite possibly. But then I don't consider that to be a bad thing looking at all the pointless "bail-outs" that are going on at the moment.

You'd have nothing to spend your money on, therefore it'd become useless.

Why would "we" have nothing to spend our physical cash on? Are products and services suddenly going to become free overnight or do you know something I don't ?

Rob

Snooze

!!!!!!? wrote: »

Yes, bears repeating that cash in the bank merely represents cash owed to you by the bank. If the bank goes bust or can't pay, welcome to a world of worry as you hope the govt compensation scheme is going to cough up.

Physical legal tender isn't going to end up as liquidated debt.


If we really are in for deflation, it makes no sense whatsoever to keep your cash in a zero-paying account at a bank that could go bust.

If we get strong inflation, then holding large amounts of physical cash is pretty stupid as it loses value and there's no interest from the bank to compensate. Actually, better to have the cash in hard assets or stocks and out of cash altogether but that's another topic.

I completely agree, or at least I did until your last sentence! Hard assets, right? You mean like houses and stuff then?

Rob

Cleaver

Snooze wrote: »

Quite possibly. But then I don't consider that to be a bad thing looking at all the pointless "bail-outs" that are going on at the moment.

You don't consider society collapsing to be a bad thing? I agree with you though that the current method of bail outs is not being done the right way.

Snooze wrote: »

Why would "we" have nothing to spend our physical cash on? Are products and services suddenly going to become free overnight or do you know something I don't ?

This is a bit of a pointless arguement, but I assume that if everyone in the counrty withdrew all of their cash over the next couple of days the financial system as we know it would collapse. There would be no ways for any businesses to operate so no one would have jobs. But even if you had a job you couldn't get paid as there would be no method of either a) obtaining the money or b) getting it to you. You would then have the social problems pretty soon after: no food, no utilities, riots, disease, famine and pretty much every other horrible thing going. At this point I wouldn't be thinking "Oh well, on the plus side I have £20k in notes under my bed".

Again, I've just made all of this up. So might be wrong.