HBOS shares

earlgrey_3

setmefree wrote: »

Now i'm really interested,Agent Orange what is your honest opinion about the thousands who have lost their homes because they couldn't keep up with the repayments because of different reasons.

Are you one of them? Is that your problem? You do seem a tad screwed up. :rolleyes:

When we had high unemployment there were many who got into problems that would have been hard for them to anticipate. In recent years it's been rather different. There will have been some who were unlucky due to illness or injury. But the majority will have got into trouble because they wanted to have more than they could afford.

You seem to want a state-provided nanny who'll stop you buying more sweets than are good for you. You possibly even need one. Most of us don't. The majority of us can run our lives without getting into the sort of problems you appear to be so bitter about.

setmefree

agent_orange wrote: »

The sad thing is, so many people have fallen into the trap of believing that the house you live in is a 'cash cow' and availed themselves of easy credit.

As for the government bailing out the banks, think about the alternatives.

The number of people whose homes were repossessed last year has risen by 21%. The Council of Mortgage Lenders said 27,100 homes, the highest figure since 1999, were taken over by lenders after people fell behind with repayments.
The figure for the UK is more than the 22,400 in 2006, but not as extreme as the CML had forecast. It is still a sharp rise on the 8,500 of 2003.
And the CML warned that the number of repossessions was likely to rise again in 2008 as the credit crunch tightened.
(Above is your thousands)
I like the way you put it homeowners think they live in a Cash Cow, could this also be applied to the banks, they treated their borrows like cash cows as well..that was until the credit crunch slowed it all down.

I do like your honesty where you say think of the alternatives regarding the government bailing the banks out, perhaps the banks should have thought of an alternative to all those that they had evicted..

Now could you please answer my earlier question,should the shareholders of Northen Rock be able to go to court for more money,and would the tax payer end up footing the bill.

The reason i'm interested in your answer is because the same then should apply to all those who lost their properties through job losses etc etc, they should be compensated the difference between the current value at the time and the Auction price. after all they didn't tell the company who they worked for to close;)

setmefree

earlgrey wrote: »

Are you one of them? Is that your problem? You do seem a tad screwed up. :rolleyes:

When we had high unemployment there were many who got into problems that would have been hard for them to anticipate. In recent years it's been rather different. There will have been some who were unlucky due to illness or injury. But the majority will have got into trouble because they wanted to have more than they could afford.

You seem to want a state-provided nanny who'll stop you buying more sweets than are good for you. You possibly even need one. Most of us don't. The majority of us can run our lives without getting into the sort of problems you appear to be so bitter about.

I have no Mortgage,and i deal with my debt very well,( A tad screwed up) thanks for that remark, once again a person who needs to make a remark with abuse.:eek:

earlgrey_3

setmefree wrote: »

I have no Mortgage,and i deal with my debt very well,( A tad screwed up) thanks for that remark, once again a person who needs to make a remark with abuse.:eek:

Well enough to own the house you want and a comfortable lifestyle? So what's the excuse for the bitterness? What's the world done to you that you find so hard to handle?

"Harbinger Capital Partners, the $25 billion (£12.7 billion) American hedge fund manager, is shorting 3.29 per cent of HBOS. Harbinger was founded by Philip Falcone, an activist investor who recently forced The New York Times to elect two new board members after criticising the newspaper company for being too slow to develop its internet offerings.

Harbinger apparently generated returns for investors of more than 65 per cent after correctly predicting the crash in the sub-prime mortgage market. Mr Falcone also attracted attention when he purchased a $49 million mansion in New York previously owned by Bob Guccione, the founder of Penthouse magazine. The FSA said yesterday that it was monitoring announcements made on the HBOS short positions."

Sounds as if you've a lot in common - apart from the $49 million mansion perhaps.

setmefree

earlgrey wrote: »

Well enough to own the house you want and a comfortable lifestyle? So what's the excuse for the bitterness? What's the world done to you that you find so hard to handle?

"Harbinger Capital Partners, the $25 billion (£12.7 billion) American hedge fund manager, is shorting 3.29 per cent of HBOS. Harbinger was founded by Philip Falcone, an activist investor who recently forced The New York Times to elect two new board members after criticising the newspaper company for being too slow to develop its internet offerings.

Harbinger apparently generated returns for investors of more than 65 per cent after correctly predicting the crash in the sub-prime mortgage market. Mr Falcone also attracted attention when he purchased a $49 million mansion in New York previously owned by Bob Guccione, the founder of Penthouse magazine. The FSA said yesterday that it was monitoring announcements made on the HBOS short positions."

Sounds as if you've a lot in common - apart from the $49 million mansion perhaps.

Here why go again,how can you compare me to the person above when i wouldn't buy a share,never have,never will.
So that's another one of your theories gone out of the window,have you never heard of Freedom Of Speech, or does it only apply when it agrees with you.
Once again you feel the need to have a go at me,what have i personally done to you.

ad44downey

Conrad wrote: »

Which Banks would people buy shares in in the comming months:

I'm thinking;

HBOS
RBOS
B & B
A & L

Any other suggestions for Banks shares that have fallen in value considerably recently?

You'd need to be mental to buy any of these. Just because their share price has halved doesn't make them value. They could well halve again as the housing market tanks over the next few years.

agent_orange_2

setmefree wrote: »

The number of people whose homes were repossessed last year has risen by 21%. The Council of Mortgage Lenders said 27,100 homes, the highest figure since 1999, were taken over by lenders after people fell behind with repayments.
The figure for the UK is more than the 22,400 in 2006, but not as extreme as the CML had forecast. It is still a sharp rise on the 8,500 of 2003.
And the CML warned that the number of repossessions was likely to rise again in 2008 as the credit crunch tightened.
(Above is your thousands)

I'm no expert in these sort of figures, I would suspect these figures are very misleading. How many of them are forced sales, how many people sold up with a profit.
I agree, banks lending practices have been irresponsible (to put it politely) and bearing in mind how much bank executives earn, one could be forgiven for thinking they should have had their eyes on the ball.

I feel sorry for some of the NR shareholders, NR employees, not to mention NR mortgage holders. But share prices go up as well as down and compensation to shareholders is a no-go. I can't imagine that shareholders would have shared their gains if the sp went up.

setmefree

Thank you for that reply agent orange, perhaps now you will see that i aint got a personal gripe, it's more of making a point that regardless of status we should all be treated the same.
After all it's the little man who over the years has put the fat cats where they are today, whether it be through investing their hard earnedmoney etc etc, so it's about time that the fat cats realised that it's the little man who can also bring them back down to where they started.:D

And here is one of my examples
THE CHICKEN

intensive grown birds contained more fat than protein , if i remember right for every 100 grammes of meat there was 28 grammes of fat.

Corn fed birds were a bit higher in Omega 3

But the clear winner was the free range bird,high on Omega 3 and a lot lower on fat.

They fact is that chickens need a few things to generate omega 3 in their bodies: Grass, Exercise and the little bugs that live in the grass.
The point being, if you buy a chicken that spends it's entire life in a Poultry Shed, it contains 10x less Omega 3 than a Free range bird. They also pointed out a chicken that doesn't exercise has just as much fat as a burger.

Who would have thought that how the food you eat is produced has a big impact on what your own body gains from that food.

So whils't this has nothing to do with shares,the fact of the matter is buying cheap is far from the best option.

agent_orange_2

The fat cats will remain fat, walking away with their massive hand outs.
The little men will remain little, their struggle undiminished.

setmefree

The 10p tax caused major upset,that in turn reduced this Government to nothing.
That's you little person having their say.
The Little person also pulled away all of his/hers money out of N.R. and reduced it to what it is now.
The little person has caused disruption not just in Britain but all over Europe with their fuel protest.
So whils't the fat cat as you say will remain fat,the little person will slowly but surely bring this country to a stand still, and then and only then will the truth emerge about the state this country is really in.