HSBC to be branded with new name

Caladan

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Yes, your annual statements will come with the new branding and if you phone them they'll answer the phone with the new brand name.

This really is a storm in a teacup, 25,000 job losses not being mentioned but what logo is going to be top left of your statments is a major thing?

A comfort to know somebody cares

Re-branding opens all sorts of doors. I read an opinion piece somewhere (can't find the link now, might have been the FT) that it doesn't make sense for HSBC to keep the UK Bank if the ring-fencing rules mean the holding company isn't allowed to control it (i.e. HSBA would own HSBC Bank Plc, but would have no input on its running or dividends). This is because it would effectively own a business it has no say in, which is more suited to asset management companies than an actively managed corporation.

The ring-fence also means the bank will be in a position to spin off/sell at pretty much any point as it'll already be a separate entity pre-packaged for an 'off the shelf' trade.

My guess is it will depend on the performance of the UK bank and the final ring-fencing rules which I think are due to be announced next year?

There's a plus side for staff if it is sold off (the ones that don't get slaughtered in redundancy that is) - The public will no longer see HSBCs multi-billion pound profits and then use them as an excuse to rip into UK employees whenever they aren't happy with a charge or interest rates (looking at the group results, the UK only generates a minor percentage of HSBAs overall profits). Not to mention all the flack staff take for prosecutions in Mexico, Switzerland etc which they had nothing to do with.

Some of you may know I have a vested interest here (Archi Bald I mean you - on a side note I always enjoyed our...debates...back when I posted actively) but my opinions are my own!

P.s. I hope it doesn't go back to the Midland name. It's a UK bank, not an English bank, and frankly Midland just doesn't sound cool.

System

Much like RBS during the Scottish referendum; they are flirting with moving their HQ for headlines.

I don't rate them as a bank and wouldn't bat an eyelid if they moved their HQ to Hong Kong or Canada.

HSBC are very much an English bank with only a handful of branches and small presence in Scotland.

Caladan wrote: »

P.s. I hope it doesn't go back to the Midland name. It's a UK bank, not an English bank, and frankly Midland just doesn't sound cool.

colsten

Heng_Leng wrote: »

I don't rate them as a bank and wouldn't bat an eyelid if they moved their HQ to Hong Kong or Canada.

I don't particularly rate them as a bank either but if they left, it would leave a lot more than 8,000 out of a job, and a massive dent in the UK corporation tax coffers. It would, bottom line, probably be a loss for the UK if they moved their HQ elsewhere.

joe134

Mysteek wrote: »

Brings back memories, I was made redundant from The Midland Bank at the end of 1987!!

been with them continuosly since 1953,when it had a branch Manager, and had to see him to get a loan, so, may do a complete circle.as it's my main bank.and, still got a local branch within walking distance.
Wouldn't change now, got most of the others too..

teffers

So they receive a massive fine in connection with money laundering.
Shortly after they announce 8,000 UK jobs are to go.
Then they decide they're going to hide the HSBC name and re-brand its branches.

Sounds completely like a bank...:money:

planteria

colsten wrote: »

It would, bottom line, probably be a loss for the UK if they moved their HQ elsewhere.

no probably about it colsten. if HSBC relocates to Hong Kong it will be a massive blow to the public purse. and there would be a lot of finger pointing as a result.

Anthorn

Looking at the speculation from various pundits we could be looking at a retail banking arm in Britain and their investment arm moving to Asia. Perhaps the new retail banking will be rebranded, "Midland".You saw it here first folks.

PaulW922

Heng_Leng wrote: »

HSBC are very much an English bank with only a handful of branches and small presence in Scotland.

This is very much a hang over from the old days of banking when there was a 'Gentlemen's agreement' for English banks not to venture into Scotland and vice-versa. This really came to an end with the mass expansion of banks in the 1980s, followed by the mergers of Halifax and Bank of Scotland and RBS and NatWest.

Of course the old Midland did have an 'under the radar' presence in Scotland as it owned Clydesdale bank (and Northern Bank in NI). These were sold off in the early 1990s (I think) when Midland had to get itself out of a few debt problems caused by an unwise attempted expansion into the US (with Crocker Bank) and serious third world debt issues.

System

If they 'left' then this would relate to the HQ only - they would either keep the non-HQ operations or sell them.

I doubt this affect as many people as you suggest and might actually create some more (UK) jobs as they use various overseas HSBC locations for many back office and call centre functions.

colsten wrote: »

I don't particularly rate them as a bank either but if they left, it would leave a lot more than 8,000 out of a job, and a massive dent in the UK corporation tax coffers. It would, bottom line, probably be a loss for the UK if they moved their HQ elsewhere.

Scarpacci

Heng_Leng wrote: »

I doubt this affect as many people as you suggest and might actually create some more (UK) jobs as they use various overseas HSBC locations for many back office and call centre functions.

That's true at the retail bank level, but the loss of jobs at the HQ level could be much greater in number if they decided to leave the UK.

It is an interesting point that a separate UK retail bank could mean more customer service and back office staff in the UK. A new branded bank might want to join the other UK banks and building societies which only use UK call centres, and that could see HSBC's UK call centres which serve First Direct expand.