We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.

This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!

Carpetbagging, anyone?

1235»

Comments

  • mulronie
    mulronie Posts: 284 Forumite

    The Shepshed has reserves (retained profit) or £6.4m, across ~7000 members.

    So each member is effectively gifting just shy of £1000 to the Nottingham. How the directors can sign this off and still be meeting their fiduciary duties genuinely baffles me... not quite as much, though, as the fact that the gift will be overwhelmingly endorsed in the vote.
  • talexuser
    talexuser Posts: 3,543 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    mulronie wrote: »
    How the directors can sign this off and still be meeting their fiduciary duties genuinely baffles me...

    But no baffles if they are much better off themselves ;)
  • Doesnt it have to be voted through by the owners, the members themselves.

    Retained profit may be needed to offset non performing assets perhaps. If they were gifting cash wouldn't another bidder appear with open arms
  • mulronie wrote: »
    The Shepshed has reserves (retained profit) or £6.4m, across ~7000 members.

    So each member is effectively gifting just shy of £1000 to the Nottingham.

    wrong.

    for shepshed, that is about £900 per member.

    meanwhile, nottingham has about £145m reserves, across 200,000 members, which is about £700 per member.

    so by pooling the reserves, shepshed members are theoretically losing about £200 each.

    however, if it's true (as the announcement claims) that the costs of running a small building society are disproportionate nowadays, then shepshed members could lose that £200 pounds advantage quite quickly (in either lower future profits or, more likely, less good savings/borrowing rates) if it remained independent.

    there is also always a question, when comparing reserves, of whether the societies have been equally cautious in making provisions for bad debts. they might over- or under-provide for bad debts (either deliberately, or they might just have different opinions), so the real picture could be very different.

    small building societies continue to drop like flies, and i suspect many of the problems they claim to have are genuine. i'm not too unhappy about it, if they merge with other building societies.
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
  • 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 454.2K Spending & Discounts
  • 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 177.5K Life & Family
  • 258.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
  • 37.6K Read-Only Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.