Will Nationwide EVER demutualise?

roddydogs

Dont foget the vote against DM by NW was small, the chance was there and you had your vote, those who voted against have only themselves to blame, look at NW now.

thor

apt wrote: »

Nationwide has many faults, but as a large mutual it has helped stabilising the financial system by rescuing a string of building societies in recent years. It would be counterproductive to demutualise.

Well savers with less than 85k are being screwed by NW. The only way they could ever benefit is if it demutualised. That way, at least savers will see some of the money instead of it being wasted on higher wages and bonuses for top management. If the directors don't like it, they can shove off. It is hardly a demanding job and I'm sure there are plenty of people out there who could do better for a fraction of the cost.

Milarky

opinions4u wrote: »

These building societies were basically mortgage factories. The Building Societies Act 1986 restricted their activities. The only way they could expand at any pace was to demutualise and tap in to the excitement of the newish concept of wholesale funding.

...it was all done on the back of being able to attract wholesale funding in order to issue more mortgages.

... if the wholesale markets dry up your business is dead in the water. A business model that relies on wholesale funds to such an extent is inherently flawed.

Good points. But, dare I say it, the reason we're in this state - dependence on 'wholesale' as opposed to 'retail' savings - is no accident. Without the volume of wholesale funding and only people's savings to fall back on house-price inflation would not have set in, The traditional model had kept housing 'cheap' for decades. The new model simply leveraged the same (largely Victorian) stock of houses up in price. There was absolutely no gain to society from this.

listonosz

doubtful if it would now be floated, as all new members for the past 10 years signed any potential shares to charity.

castle96

and the Manager used to stand in the front, 'persuading' people to "vote withe the Board", on their voting papers !

Old_Slaphead

listonosz wrote: »

doubtful if it would now be floated, as all new members for the past 10 years signed any potential shares to charity.

I'm pretty sure that rule would not be invoked if the directors wanted to demutualise.

They will list sometime in future but whether that's 1 or 20 years from now ???