Voting online in proposed Yorkshire-Chelsea makover

martinman3

Firstly, I recommend that every member of Chelsea or Yorkshire BS shred the "Questions and answers for members" document as the answers in there are very misleading. If you really want to know what will happen then you must read the "Merger booklet" !

mbamick wrote: »

On the face of it - and reading the documents sent through by the YBS - I could see the merit in merging the YBS (with a typically Northern emphasis to its network of branches) with the Chelsea (with a predominantly Southern portfolio of branches). Creating a wider branch network would benefit the business, and its members too.

I was prepared to vote yes for that reason alone as I live in the south and Yorkshire BS branches are few and far between.
However, the merger booklet states that all Chelsea branches except those where a Yorkshire branch was closed will only be able to deal with Chelsea accounts. So much for the "wider branch network" theory, and ironic that a Yorkshire customer would get better service using MutualPlus at a Brittania branch than a Chelsea one ! (But for how long will MutualPlus continue I wonder ?)

For me the important part of the chairman's' letter is
".. notwithstanding a continuation of the current difficult economic conditions, the Yorkshire would expect to return to profitability in 2010 if the Merger did not take place, ..."

YBS does not need this merger and it is based on assumptions that losses at Chelsea will not increase by more than another £200m and that economic condition will improve. :rolleyes:

Advice to YBS board, walk away and pick over the bones of Chelsea when it collapses/FSCS triggered !

p.s. Maybe the real reason for the board of YBS wanting the merger is that the FSCS payment if Chelsea goes under is more than the cost of the merger to YBS.

ed123_2

....as a Chelsea member I will vote yes although I agree from a Yorkshire view the merger has little merit....

oldagetraveller

I've not has a voting pack from YBS yet. When/if it does arrive then I'll be voting no in spite of it being a "done deal" already.

Chadsman

Will the board members of Chelsea retain any position in the merged society if the deal goes ahead?

cardsharps

Ian_W wrote: »

My views are similar to mbamick's so I've just cast my online vote as a NO.

You really think so?
From YBS Merger booklet FAQ's:
That's a fairly high hurdle for the Board to clear. I think they may well be surprised that savers don't see the advantages they see of taking on someone else's huge debt mountain.

Of course the advantages the Directors see might be that a much enlarged Society would need to pay it's Directors a much higher stipend in order to attract and retain the right calibre of person - or is that just cynical of moi? :rotfl:

I'm sorry but you clearly don't understand how these sorts of votes work. They send you a voting form with a recommendation that you vote in favour of the board. they even helpfully tell you which box to click. and guess what, the vast majority of sheep do as they're told.

They always get at least 90% of the vote. This is democracy, building society -style, you and a few others can protest but it won't affect the result

Old_Slaphead

Chelsea BS up to mid 2009 had accumulated reserves of £400+million.

Given that these are significantly more than the losses over the last couple of years then where's the problem ?

Surely that's what reserves are for - to cushion the company in the bad years.....or am I missing something?


I was talking to a ex-Derbys BS manager recently - he said it was simply a confidence thing - if they'd been shown as making losses there'd quickly be a run on the BS. Given some of the BS figures being produced now, he said DBS were no where near as bad and could have probably survived but for the 'confidence' issue.

Sceptic001

It is clear that the Chelsea has got itself into a mess and is being rescued by the Yorkshire. Logic would suggest that it is in Chelsea members' interests to vote Yes as a matter of self-preservation, and YBS members to vote No to avoid getting involved.

But what do you do if you are a member of both?

nilrem_2

ed123 wrote: »

....as a Chelsea member I will vote yes although I agree from a Yorkshire view the merger has little merit....

Same here TBH.

baby_boomer

I'm voting no at Chelsea. The board needs to be given a flea in its ear for presiding over such mismanagement and betrayal of mutuality as it sought profits through risky enterprises while guaranteeing unseemly salaries, bonuses and pensions as a reward for what turned out to be collossal failure.

I'm voting no at Yorkshire. Why should YBS be saddled with such a loss-making enterprise as Chelsea? I don't trust the Yorkshire board's assertion that they have sorted out the lousy capital situation at Chelsea. It's likely that they are doing what the FSA has requested of them and I certainly don't trust the FSA. Chief Executive Iain Cornish's long term motive will be a vastly increased personal salary & pension from a merged society and so he may say whatever it takes to get our vote.

I'm ignoring the posters who say there's no point voting and it's a done deal. Why do they bother to post if they are genuine and believe what they say? I won't waste my breath next May telling others not to exercise their right to vote in Kensington & Chelsea or Sheffield Central in the General Election. It's democracy in practice .

Let's all vote for what we believe . It's a vital component of a free society.

Ian_W

cardsharps wrote: »

They always get at least 90% of the vote. This is democracy, building society -style, you and a few others can protest but it won't affect the result

You may be right, but, of course, the only alternative is to join the sheep! :rolleyes:

I'm not protesting, if I was my YBS account would be closed, I just don't see the benefit of this for YBS or its members outweighing the risks. I bet the LTSB board rather wish they hadn't rushed to accept the governments kind offer to take over HBOS with no competition rules to worry about.

The Merger booklet (page 6) explains that the holders of £200m in subordinated debt at Chelsea have agreed to exchange this for £100m in subordinated YBS debt.
Why would these creditors willing accept 50p in the pound?
Only reason I can think of is that they KNOW that Chelsea on it's own wouldn't even be able to pay back 50% of what it owed.

So when the booklet discribes Chelsea's financial performance since the credit crunch as a "disappointing period" perhaps that is boardroom speak for BUST!
By all means do a Santander and buy the best bits but don't saddle YBS with the dross.