Nationwide take over of Virgin Money

26left

Nasqueron said:

26left said:

For any Nationwide members who would like to vote on the proposed takeover there's a petition running at change.org - just google Nationwide Virgin Money petition or try bit (dot) ly (slash) NationwideVote

This is a little misleading, voting on a change.org petition is not any sort of official thing and it won't make any difference. 16m members and under 100 (at time of posting) who have signed it in the 6 days since launch

Now over half way there with over 250 signatories 

https://www.change.org/p/give-nationwide-members-a-say-on-the-purchase-of-virgin-money

Lightning360

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Interesting tidbit buried in there:

"This includes Nationwide's unique Branch Promise, which we are extending until at least the start of 2028. The Promise will also apply to Virgin Money branches."

Presume that'd still allow them to close one branch or the other in areas where they have both.

The promise already allows them to close branches in towns/cities with multiple Nationwide branches, and also allows them to close branches for reasons "outside their control". I find it incredibly misleading that they can say "We aren't closing our branches" when that very same promise means they can close branches. But that just seems to be what the new Nationwide is like now.

Here's Nationwide's press release about the extension to their "promise".

Nationwide Building Society confirms offer for Virgin Money UK PLC and extends Branch Promise (nationwidemediacentre.co.uk)

To play devils advocate, which branches are they closing? If the answer is 'none, but they still could and not breach their "promise" ' then the samement "we aren't closing our branches" is accurate.

A quick search suggests that they have closed some branches since introducing this promise.

You answered a different question - they have closed many branches. Which branches are they closing, please?

It is still a relevant answer as it shows that, despite their promise that they are "not closing branches", they have, in fact, closed branches since this promise was around. So yes, they have indeed closed branches despite them saying they aren't closing branches.

You're still answering a different question. They could have closed 100 branches since the branch promise began, but unless they are closing any presently it's still true that they aren't closing their branches. They've crafted their statement in such a way to offer no commentary of past or future closures.

(I think the number is about 10, most of which were within a small geographic area in London, and none in the last year)

Whatever you think about the statement, the ASA has banned Nationwide's advert because they were deemed misleading.

Nationwide's Dominic West advert banned by watchdog - BBC News

EarthBoy

26left said:

Now over half way there with over 250 signatories 

https://www.change.org/p/give-nationwide-members-a-say-on-the-purchase-of-virgin-money

But how many have paid, or are willing to pay, the necessary £50 deposit?  

WillPS

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Interesting tidbit buried in there:

"This includes Nationwide's unique Branch Promise, which we are extending until at least the start of 2028. The Promise will also apply to Virgin Money branches."

Presume that'd still allow them to close one branch or the other in areas where they have both.

The promise already allows them to close branches in towns/cities with multiple Nationwide branches, and also allows them to close branches for reasons "outside their control". I find it incredibly misleading that they can say "We aren't closing our branches" when that very same promise means they can close branches. But that just seems to be what the new Nationwide is like now.

Here's Nationwide's press release about the extension to their "promise".

Nationwide Building Society confirms offer for Virgin Money UK PLC and extends Branch Promise (nationwidemediacentre.co.uk)

To play devils advocate, which branches are they closing? If the answer is 'none, but they still could and not breach their "promise" ' then the samement "we aren't closing our branches" is accurate.

A quick search suggests that they have closed some branches since introducing this promise.

You answered a different question - they have closed many branches. Which branches are they closing, please?

It is still a relevant answer as it shows that, despite their promise that they are "not closing branches", they have, in fact, closed branches since this promise was around. So yes, they have indeed closed branches despite them saying they aren't closing branches.

You're still answering a different question. They could have closed 100 branches since the branch promise began, but unless they are closing any presently it's still true that they aren't closing their branches. They've crafted their statement in such a way to offer no commentary of past or future closures.

(I think the number is about 10, most of which were within a small geographic area in London, and none in the last year)

Whatever you think about the statement, the ASA has banned Nationwide's advert because they were deemed misleading.

Nationwide's Dominic West advert banned by watchdog - BBC News

It's the right result, the advert was misleading.

Lightning360

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Interesting tidbit buried in there:

"This includes Nationwide's unique Branch Promise, which we are extending until at least the start of 2028. The Promise will also apply to Virgin Money branches."

Presume that'd still allow them to close one branch or the other in areas where they have both.

The promise already allows them to close branches in towns/cities with multiple Nationwide branches, and also allows them to close branches for reasons "outside their control". I find it incredibly misleading that they can say "We aren't closing our branches" when that very same promise means they can close branches. But that just seems to be what the new Nationwide is like now.

Here's Nationwide's press release about the extension to their "promise".

Nationwide Building Society confirms offer for Virgin Money UK PLC and extends Branch Promise (nationwidemediacentre.co.uk)

To play devils advocate, which branches are they closing? If the answer is 'none, but they still could and not breach their "promise" ' then the samement "we aren't closing our branches" is accurate.

A quick search suggests that they have closed some branches since introducing this promise.

You answered a different question - they have closed many branches. Which branches are they closing, please?

It is still a relevant answer as it shows that, despite their promise that they are "not closing branches", they have, in fact, closed branches since this promise was around. So yes, they have indeed closed branches despite them saying they aren't closing branches.

You're still answering a different question. They could have closed 100 branches since the branch promise began, but unless they are closing any presently it's still true that they aren't closing their branches. They've crafted their statement in such a way to offer no commentary of past or future closures.

(I think the number is about 10, most of which were within a small geographic area in London, and none in the last year)

Whatever you think about the statement, the ASA has banned Nationwide's advert because they were deemed misleading.

Nationwide's Dominic West advert banned by watchdog - BBC News

It's the right result, the advert was misleading.

Just a shame Nationwide feels the need to put out adverts like this which were clearly misleading. Seems the old Nationwide with actual ethics is dead and they are now just like any other bank/building society.

WillPS

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Lightning360 said:

WillPS said:

Interesting tidbit buried in there:

"This includes Nationwide's unique Branch Promise, which we are extending until at least the start of 2028. The Promise will also apply to Virgin Money branches."

Presume that'd still allow them to close one branch or the other in areas where they have both.

The promise already allows them to close branches in towns/cities with multiple Nationwide branches, and also allows them to close branches for reasons "outside their control". I find it incredibly misleading that they can say "We aren't closing our branches" when that very same promise means they can close branches. But that just seems to be what the new Nationwide is like now.

Here's Nationwide's press release about the extension to their "promise".

Nationwide Building Society confirms offer for Virgin Money UK PLC and extends Branch Promise (nationwidemediacentre.co.uk)

To play devils advocate, which branches are they closing? If the answer is 'none, but they still could and not breach their "promise" ' then the samement "we aren't closing our branches" is accurate.

A quick search suggests that they have closed some branches since introducing this promise.

You answered a different question - they have closed many branches. Which branches are they closing, please?

It is still a relevant answer as it shows that, despite their promise that they are "not closing branches", they have, in fact, closed branches since this promise was around. So yes, they have indeed closed branches despite them saying they aren't closing branches.

You're still answering a different question. They could have closed 100 branches since the branch promise began, but unless they are closing any presently it's still true that they aren't closing their branches. They've crafted their statement in such a way to offer no commentary of past or future closures.

(I think the number is about 10, most of which were within a small geographic area in London, and none in the last year)

Whatever you think about the statement, the ASA has banned Nationwide's advert because they were deemed misleading.

Nationwide's Dominic West advert banned by watchdog - BBC News

It's the right result, the advert was misleading.

Just a shame Nationwide feels the need to put out adverts like this which were clearly misleading. Seems the old Nationwide with actual ethics is dead and they are now just like any other bank/building society.

It's all just marketing ultimately. The previous marketing was that awful poetry stuff, some of them were utterly cringey - sadly there's no ASA criteria under which such adverts can be reported. I had accounts then because they were worth having, and I continue to hold accounts now because they're worth having.

boingy

I thoroughly enjoyed the banned adverts, not because of their content but because whenever I see Dominic West in anything it reminds me of the character he played in Brassic - a depraved and entirely unethical GP with an obsession for knees. I'm smiling now at the thought of it. 

The fact is the adverts did their job and now that they are banned they'll do the job a bit more. Free publicity.

Nasqueron

26left said:

Nasqueron said:

26left said:

For any Nationwide members who would like to vote on the proposed takeover there's a petition running at change.org - just google Nationwide Virgin Money petition or try bit (dot) ly (slash) NationwideVote

This is a little misleading, voting on a change.org petition is not any sort of official thing and it won't make any difference. 16m members and under 100 (at time of posting) who have signed it in the 6 days since launch

Now over half way there with over 250 signatories 

https://www.change.org/p/give-nationwide-members-a-say-on-the-purchase-of-virgin-money

Half way to what? The generic 500 total? There are SIXTEEN MILLION members of Nationwide, this survey has now been running, what another week and there are 335 signatures, meaning 0.002% of members have signed it. It is not going to change anything, even if they get 500 and pay some random person £50 each, it will not stop the takeover

TheBanker

Nasqueron said:

26left said:

Nasqueron said:

26left said:

For any Nationwide members who would like to vote on the proposed takeover there's a petition running at change.org - just google Nationwide Virgin Money petition or try bit (dot) ly (slash) NationwideVote

This is a little misleading, voting on a change.org petition is not any sort of official thing and it won't make any difference. 16m members and under 100 (at time of posting) who have signed it in the 6 days since launch

Now over half way there with over 250 signatories 

https://www.change.org/p/give-nationwide-members-a-say-on-the-purchase-of-virgin-money

Half way to what? The generic 500 total? There are SIXTEEN MILLION members of Nationwide, this survey has now been running, what another week and there are 335 signatures, meaning 0.002% of members have signed it. It is not going to change anything, even if they get 500 and pay some random person £50 each, it will not stop the takeover

Indeed - even assuming this petition manages to force a vote, how on earth would they persuare eight million and one members to vote in favour, when less than 400 have signed the petition so far?

Clearly, for better or worse this is not an issue that the majority of Nationwide members care about one way or the other.

Section62

TheBanker said:

Nasqueron said:

26left said:

Nasqueron said:

26left said:

For any Nationwide members who would like to vote on the proposed takeover there's a petition running at change.org - just google Nationwide Virgin Money petition or try bit (dot) ly (slash) NationwideVote

This is a little misleading, voting on a change.org petition is not any sort of official thing and it won't make any difference. 16m members and under 100 (at time of posting) who have signed it in the 6 days since launch

Now over half way there with over 250 signatories 

https://www.change.org/p/give-nationwide-members-a-say-on-the-purchase-of-virgin-money

Half way to what? The generic 500 total? There are SIXTEEN MILLION members of Nationwide, this survey has now been running, what another week and there are 335 signatures, meaning 0.002% of members have signed it. It is not going to change anything, even if they get 500 and pay some random person £50 each, it will not stop the takeover

Indeed - even assuming this petition manages to force a vote, how on earth would they persuare eight million and one members to vote in favour, when less than 400 have signed the petition so far?

Clearly, for better or worse this is not an issue that the majority of Nationwide members care about one way or the other.

There's a world of difference between handing over your personal details to a complete stranger and giving them £50, and ticking an electronic box on a secure voting form provided by Nationwide themselves.  With no disrespect to the people organising the petition, I suspect a lot of people who might be willing to put their name to the petition won't do so because of the personal risk involved. (this is a fundamental weakness in Nationwide's rules)

Your maths is also a bit off.  Although Nationwide has around 16 million members, the AGM/SGM voting arrangements are based on a simple majority and not a super majority.  Given past voting at AGMs has been around the half-million mark (in total) then rather than the "eight million and one" votes you suggest would be needed, the figure is more likely to be around 250,001.

Moreover, if 500 members were sucessful at requiring a SGM to be held then I believe the resultant publicity and media analysis is likely to draw out potential 'no' voters who thus far have believed Nationwide's claim that a vote isn't required and/or media claims that a vote can't take place.  There is precedent for an issue which was relatively low on people's agenda turning out to be something where the final vote wasn't what was expected by those in authority.  Your final sentence is reminiscent of what was confidently predicted by authority figures back then too.

The way I see it, the real issue here is not whether an eventual vote would stop the takeover (I don't think it will) but rather that if 500 people can organise themselves to reach Nationwide's high bar to democratic involvement then it may have the effect of reminding the NW board that it is the members who own the building society and their views need to be better listened to in future.  The current model is broken.

Boardroom complacency has stuffed up far too many UK companies in the past.  Believing you have 95%+ support/approval is not healthy.  Boardrooms getting the occasional wakeup call from shareholders can work wonders.