RBS has lost all of the taxpayer bailout

Conrad

The new CEO's statement of intent was broadcast live on Radio 5 this morning and his words were impressive, talk of returning it to a trusted old fashioned British only Bank with customer values front and central., and unlike others that purport to be doing the same this CEO will really deliver from top to bottom.


However, as someone that's been around FS a long time I cannot envisage how he will manage this because I know right now there will be low ranking sales managers in there bashing heads together in meetings designed to humiliate all those that have not sold enough product to customers this week, the pressure to deliver all coming ultimately from shareholders such as pension funds.


Not sure shareholders will play along with this return to misty eyed 1970's 'fair profit' Banking. Bank staff are now sales people.

CLAPTON

whenever a company talks about 'trust' you just know they are untrustworthy

N1AK

Bantex wrote: »

The bailout went way beyond just guaranteeing customer deposits. Most were covered anyway.

You're just making his point. If RBS going bankrupt would have required billions from the government to compensate account holders then it's not accurate to pretend spending that money on bailing them out instead is magically different and a worse use of the money.

We've bought the majority of the bank, with a large amount of the money being money we'd have given as compensation if they went bankrupt. Did we pay a fair price? Probably not, in my opinion, but I'm not remotely convinced that letting it fail would have worked out better for us.

wymondham

So we bailed out RBS and they lost it, now we are rewarding this failure by giving large bonuses.... its a different world these people live in, but we seem to always be the ones to pay...


Sorry everyone I'm noticing as I get older I rant more... but this doesn't help!

N1AK

wymondham wrote: »

So we bailed out RBS and they lost it, now we are rewarding this failure by giving large bonuses.... its a different world these people live in, but we seem to always be the ones to pay...

What did you think the bailout was for? Of course they were expected to lose all, or most of it, if they weren't then they wouldn't need a bail out!

We've bought most of the bank and the only people who seem to be whining about losing money on it are the same, apparently uninformed, people who want to destroy the bank (and really lose the money) by interfering with the minutiae of how it operates.

nickj_2

i would have thought that a company could only pay out a bonus if they have produced a good profit ,as rbs hasn't made a profit for years then there should be no bonus , it's oft said that if a company desn't pay a bonus then the best staff would go else where , i say , let them go , they helped get the bank in the mess in the first place

CLAPTON

wymondham wrote: »

So we bailed out RBS and they lost it, now we are rewarding this failure by giving large bonuses.... its a different world these people live in, but we seem to always be the ones to pay...


Sorry everyone I'm noticing as I get older I rant more... but this doesn't help!

what would you have done?

chewmylegoff

wymondham wrote: »

So we bailed out RBS and they lost it, now we are rewarding this failure by giving large bonuses.... its a different world these people live in, but we seem to always be the ones to pay...


Sorry everyone I'm noticing as I get older I rant more... but this doesn't help!

At least the bonuses are only being paid in worthless RBS shares that they can't sell for several years these days...

I got contacted by an RBS recruiter a couple of years ago asking me if I was interested in what was quite a good job on paper - I would have gone for an interview if it was at any other bank. Instead I just had a good laugh when she tried to sell me the role by referring to RBS's unique way of remunerating its staff.

Bantex_2

CLAPTON wrote: »

what would you have done?

Given the taxpayers of the country shares equal to the bailout. Thereby giving them rights at AGMs etc. And also a chance to see rewards if and when there is a return to profits. Think would have been around £2000 pounds worth per taxpayer.

wymondham

CLAPTON wrote: »

what would you have done?

In my simplistic mind its a simple decision. Is RBS a privately owned company - yes, then let it fail. I know I'm not informed as well as most on here and don't claim to have a grasp of this, but private companies are just that, private - they succeed if they are well run or they fail if poorly run... I'll keep my head below the firing line now!