Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Darkest day for Scottish banking as the Bank of Scotland faces its end

View Video
Download Video

Video

The Scotsman's Bill Jamieson gives his analysis of the proposed HBOS/Lloyds TSB merger

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 18 September 2008
FOR Scotland's oldest bank, it was the suddenness of its rout that stunned. That and the silence at the top. That and the invisibility of leadership. That and the short-selling frenzy that descended on HBOS shares yesterday, like vultures on a corpse.
This was the blackest day in Scottish banking. An appalling day of shock, confusion and disbelief.

Many this morning will still be aghast at the speed of the bank's share collapse. Anger and a reckoning will come later. Today, the fate of HBOS, the savings of its 22 million customers, the prospects for its 72,000 staff and the final reckoning for its 1.2 million hapless investors – whose shares have been savaged – rest on the merger with rival Lloyds TSB.

Yesterday, in conditions of near pandemonium, shares in HBOS had by far their worst day since the onset of the credit crisis. Monday and Tuesday were train-wreck enough – the value of HBOS had plunged by £7 billion by Tuesday night. So there was a surge of relief when the shares opened firmer at the start of trading yesterday. It did not last long.

The shares opened at 200p, rose to 214p, then plunged to only 88p – an astonishing collapse of 56 per cent in less than an hour. Then came reports of "advanced" merger talks with Lloyds TSB, at a price of 300p a share.

The shares rallied – only to fall back again. Amid ever-growing confusion in the market, the mooted bid terms were now corrected – to 200p a share.

By the close, shares in HBOS were still being traded – astonishing for a company said to be in "advanced merger talks". They finished at 147.10p, down almost 20 per cent – a further loss of value of £1.9 billion.

That suggests an ominous lack of confidence. The price-tag on HBOS, Britain's biggest mortgage lender, has now sunk to only £9.6 billion, 83 per cent down on the level a year ago.

IN THE rolling credit crisis, more than £46 billion of the bank's shareholder value has evaporated into thin air. The collapse has hit pension funds, wiped out the nest-eggs of many investors – and added to the misery of staff, many of whom had built up substantial holdings of HBOS shares.

Earlier this year, in a desperate attempt to shore up confidence in the bank, 250 senior managers together bought 1.4 million shares at 446.25p out of their own savings. The cost of the investment was £6 million. By last night, that investment had tumbled to barely £2 million – a loss of two-thirds in barely six months.

Bank of Scotland, formed in 1695 and merged with the Halifax to form HBOS less than a decade ago, was a bank that loved its history.

Its founding constitution and articles are kept like sacred relics in a special glass container and screened off behind a polished wooden panel near the boardroom in the bank's recently refurbished headquarters on The Mound in Edinburgh.

THE bank has survived European revolutions, agricultural depressions, two world wars, stock market crashes and too many recessions to mention. Now it has succumbed to the greatest convulsion in financial markets since 1929.

In hundreds of bank branches across Scotland yesterday, staff maintained the pretence of business as usual. There were no queues of fearful customers anxious to withdraw their savings.

But sources in the bank say it was different among wealthier customers with accounts at the bank's headquarters.

"We've seen a number withdrawing their savings in recent weeks," one said. "Younger customers have taken the share fall this year in their stride. It's the older customers – 50-plus – with their pensions and life savings who've been really anxious."

As for corporate clients, one HBOS business customer told me: "I was speaking to our account manager at HBOS a few days ago. I said, 'Things are looking shaky'. His reply was not exactly reassuring: 'Not half as shaky as they are in here'."

And where has the leadership been? The chief executive, Andy Hornby, and the chairman, Sir Dennis Stephenson, have barely been seen. There have been few public appearances to reassure customers and rally the staff.

THE first thing staff at HBOS knew about merger talks was when they read the news on the BBC website yesterday.

Later yesterday, it fell to me, as a routine HBOS customer, to tell the staff at my local branch the takeover talks had been confirmed. "You're telling us", the staffer said. "We know nothing about it."

This reluctance of the bank's leaders to step up is a recurring feature. Did they know more than Stock Exchange regulations would allow them to say?

Anxious though many staffers now are about the future, at branch level there seems little loyalty to the leadership.

For centuries, Scotland has prided itself on its skills in banking and finance. Our banks, with their unique legal constitution and distinctive notes, became part of our national definition.

But the manner of this collapse – from the misjudgments of its management through the flabbiness of regulators to the final orgy by short-sellers – "City spivs", in the scathing denunciation of Alex Salmond, the First Minister, yesterday – has dealt a smashing blow, not just to Scottish banking but to Scottish pride.

AND it may not be the only one. A source familiar with the situation yesterday warned that Scotland may be in danger of losing both its banks.

"This is a revolutionary day for the banking sector," the source said. "Nothing is ever going to be the same. Look at the state of the markets. There's still another shoe to fall – a merger of Royal Bank of Scotland with HSBC."

There is no suggestion such a move is being contemplated, but in the febrile chaos of this week – with bank shares reeling on Wall Street and in London – nothing can be ruled out.

Snarled one broker: "The mood is bad, bad, bad out there. People in the City are worrying about their jobs. They don't know if they are going to get paid. If Lehman can go down and AIG can fall apart, that makes everyone very nervous indeed."

The acute worry yesterday for the bank, the regulatory authorities and the government was that the run on HBOS shares would create enough fear among its financiers – providers of wholesale credit who give the bank its money – for there to be a withdrawal of credit for HBOS.

It emerged that the Prime Minister, desperate to avoid another Northern Rock, had urged Sir Victor Blank, the Lloyds TSB chairman, to avoid a systemic crisis by buying HBOS.

Bank of Scotland's golden era was in the late 1980s and 1990s when, under the stewardship of Bruce Patullo, it built up a corporate lending business and introduced electronic home banking for business customers.

AND it was what Patullo did not do, as much as what he did, that built the reputation and strength of BoS. He avoided the fads and fashions of the stock market. He resisted pressure for the bank to buy a stockbroker. And he turned down offer after offer for the bank to go into estate agency.

Critics accused the bank of over-caution. But the City and the shareholders – or proprietors as they were known up until 1999 – loved it.

BoS market capitalisation overtook that of rival Royal Bank of Scotland. And it was BoS that opened the bidding battle for National Westminster Bank. But RBS came in later with a higher offer, and defeat in that battle left BoS looking vulnerable to a predator. Soon after came a merger with the Halifax.

In the jostling for key positions, senior BoS executives found themselves losing out to what became nicknamed "The Haliban". Many BoS "lifers" left.

As interest rates were cut and house prices took off, the HBOS business model looked a winner. But the world of 125 per cent loan-to-value mortgages and house price to income multiples stretching to seven times appalled those of the old guard who remained.

THE chief executive, James Crosby, wanted to rein back on mortgage lending. But he lost out in a power struggle. Soon after, he bowed out, to be replaced by Andy Hornby, a young executive from the supermarket group Asda.

HBOS was to have one last Great Hurrah in the mortgage market. Early in 2007, there was a declaration it intended to get its market share back up to 20 per cent. But within months, the credit crisis had struck. HBOS was to face "the perfect storm".

Anger is building among the financial community over poor regulation. Simon Mansell, an independent financial adviser, said last night: "HBOS has 20 per cent of the UK mortgage market at a time when a 25 per cent fall in UK house prices is predicted.

"Where was the FSA (Financial Services Authority] when it came to income multiples of nine times salary? The FSA has been too busy regulating the monkey, not the organ grinder."

Fear for 40,000 jobs

A GOVERNMENT-backed deal to push through a merger today between HBOS and Lloyds TSB could result in up to 40,000 job cuts across the UK.

The tie-up – prompted after speculative trading led to massive falls in HBOS's share price – would create a banking colossus with almost a third of the UK's mortgage market.

Last night, it was reported the boards of the two banks had agreed a £12 billion deal for HBOS, at a price of 232p per HBOS share.

The deal can be traced to Monday night when , at a private event hosted by Citigroup in London, Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, personally met Sir Victor Blank, the City grandee who chairs Lloyds-TSB – a bank which has been looking for some time to expand by merging with a rival.

At 10am the following morning, Mr Brown met Mervyn King, the Bank of England Governor, and Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, at Downing Street. Spokesmen would later claim it was a routine, pre-arranged meeting, but the subject under discussion was anything but normal. After intense negotiations, the deal was clinched shortly after 9:30pm last night and was set to be announced this morning.

It has also emerged that the Financial Services Authority contacted a number of other banks in recent days over a possible merger, including HSBC. However, Lloyds was the only lender willing to take on HBOS without a large government guarantee.

As the negotiations were supported by the Prime Minister, the Treasury and the FSA watchdog, analysts said this suggested the usual competition rules would be suspended to allow the deal to proceed.

A Treasury source told The Scotsman the Enterprise Act would be amended "because there may be issues of competition and this is so serious we would want to override them". It is understood a public interest get-out clause would be used. The "key things" were "stability and protecting savers", the source said.

The London stock market was rocked by further turmoil yesterday, with the FTSE 100 index closing below 5,000 for the first time since June 2005. Meanwhile, on Wall Street, the Dow Jones Industrial Average shed 4.1 per cent as traders reeled from the US government's bailout of insurance giant AIG.

The HBOS deal would combine a UK workforce of about 145,000 and, although there was no confirmation of job cuts, sources warned losses could hit 40,000. Unions have warned they would not accept any compulsory redundancies.

Following the deal, Lloyds chief executive Eric Daniels is expected to take the helm of the enlarged group. The future of HBOS chief Andy Hornby, who joined three years ago, is unclear.



The merger could signal the end of decades of tradition – Bank of Scotland could lose its right to print banknotes if it loses its individual plc status.

News of the negotiations broke the day after shares in HBOS plummeted by 40 per cent. When the City became aware of the talks, shares in both banks gained great ground.

The combined bank would become a lending and savings giant, with more than £330 billion of mortgages and £300 billion of deposits. Analysts were split over whether the marriage would be good news for customers.

Ken Murray, the Edinburgh-based chief executive of Blue Planet Investment Management, said: "This is very good news. But there was never any need to worry in the first place, as the problems were greatly exaggerated."

Richard Hunter, head of equities at the stockbroker Hargreaves Lansdown, said: "You can see the logic between a tie-up between HBOS and Lloyds TSB. It would help stabilise both companies in terms of the jitters we are experiencing in the financial sector."

However, Ray Boulger, the senior technical manager at John Charcol, said: "It is bad news for consumers – any reduction in competition is nearly always bad news for consumers."

He said the big concern would be that most of the brands at HBOS – which includes Halifax, Bank of Scotland and Birmingham Midshires – would be collapsed into the brands of the company that was taking it over.

He said while Lloyds TSB's mortgage firm Cheltenham & Gloucester's rates generally had the edge over the ones being offered by Halifax, the HBOS group had a far wider product portfolio and was still lending to people with only a 5 per cent deposit, whereas C&G demands 10 per cent.

Mr Boulger also said that, while the Competition Commission was likely to raise concerns about a merger, it was unlikely it would block it.

Kevin Mountford, the head of banking at moneysupermarket.com, said: "A shotgun marriage of HBOS and Lloyds TSB would not be in the best interests of British consumers."

He said with Alliance & Leicester being taken over by Abbey's parent, Santander, and Nationwide taking over two building societies, there was a big reduction in competition and consumer choice.

Nic Clarke, an analyst at Charles Stanley Stockbrokers, said: "Lloyds might think that HBOS is historically very cheap – it was trading at £11 a share at its recent peak, but shares were worth just £1.40 after (yesterday] morning's sell-off. Maybe they saw that the price outweighed the negatives."

Rival banking giant HSBC was said to be interested in acquiring HBOS but was unwilling to pay anything for the bank's shares.

Keith Bowman, of Hargreaves Lansdown, said: "Lloyds finds itself in an opportune position with cash to spend on an acquisition in very difficult times. If the price is reasonably good, that will hopefully result in the Lloyds share price going forward."

HBOS staff admitted they were concerned for their jobs, while furious union leaders blamed "corporate greed" for bringing the financial sector to its knees.

Graham Goddard, the deputy general secretary of Unite, said: "With an economic downturn biting, thousands of staff at both banks will be very worried about the consequences of a merger. Unite is calling for urgent talks at the highest level with the banks. We will not accept any compulsory redundancies as a result of this merger."

Mark Lazarowicz, the MP for Edinburgh North and Leith, who has many HBOS staff among his constituents, said: "If HBOS does merge with Lloyds TSB, there will be a lot of concerns amongst those who work for the bank or whose jobs depend indirectly on the activities of HBOS.

"The Scottish base of HBOS is one of its strengths, and it is important that the headquarters operations of HBOS in Edinburgh, and elsewhere in Scotland, are not lost or diminished as a result of any merger."

Lindsay McIntosh

Attention turns to future of RBS – and nothing's ruled out

HBOS is on the brink of a bombshell "rescue" takeover by Lloyds TSB.

But even before that dust settles, the City is wondering about the prospects for that other – even bigger – Scottish-domiciled banking giant, Royal Bank of Scotland.

Is there another massive name to drop among Britain's big five banks in the wake of the mayhem being exported across the Atlantic from Wall Street? And could it be RBS?

The odds suggest that such a move on the Royal – some traders have mentioned HSBC to play the Lloyds TSB "rescuer" role – is pretty unlikely.

Does RBS need "rescuing"? The bank is a lot bigger than HBOS, much more geographically diversified, better-funded, and has far less dependence on the frozen money markets than its Scottish rival.

In addition, RBS has only a 6 per cent share of the troubled UK mortgage market compared to the 20 per cent share that many saw as HBOS's Achilles' heel in these difficult times.

RBS also recently raised three times more than HBOS on the stock market to beef up its balance sheet, £12 billion compared with £4 billion.

But analysts are saying nothing can be ruled out given the extraordinary failures in the western banking world this year, and particularly the past unprecedentedly traumatic few days. RBS is well-capitalised. But so was Merrill Lynch, so was HBOS...

They point to RBS's recent posting of a near-£700 million interim loss on the back of £5.9 billion of credit market- related writedowns.

Its management credibility under chief executive Sir Fred Goodwin and chairman Sir Tom McKillop has suffered accordingly.

RBS also has a heavy exposure to the United States via its Citizens Bank subsidiary.

One banking analyst last night said: "The British bank whose stock has tracked HBOS most closely in the past difficult year has been RBS.

"That is why there have been concerns that the speculators would target it, or perhaps Barclays, following the raid on HBOS shares."

And the HSBC rumour? Both it and RBS have a big American presence.

HSBC is big in Asia, and RBS, via its 5 per cent stake in Bank of China, has signalled its ambitions there.

The balance of percentages suggest RBS being taken out remains very unlikely. But, in this febrile climate, the truth is: who knows?

Martin Flanagan

The full article contains 3013 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Angus Ogg,

17/09/2008 23:24:19

How on earth can The Bank Of Scotland become history in 48 hours? Not fiction but fact.

We now have verification that the new company is to be called Lloyds-Halifax and one of Scotland's most venerable institutions has gone forever.

Not to mention the Edinburgh BoS HQ. Gone.

Unless Cat Man Brown-McAvitie gets a grip, next week we will have HSBC taking over the Royal Bank of Scotland. To be called what? Royal-HSBC ?

Within 14 days Scotland has no bank bearing it's namesake?

An utter disgrace.
2

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 00:11:04


Oh Well there goes the Scottish notes, no-more our own £10 and £20 pound notes, no-more Scottish history printed on our notes, its a shame.

I remember quite well, my daughters growing up and asking,....

"Whys the Forth Road bridge on the £10 dad?"

"Who's that Man on the £10 dad?", etc, etc.

All history now 'HUH'?

AGAIN! Scotland succumbs to being the 'under-dogs'!

Bouts time we got a 'Grip' and fly our Flag with meaning!
3

Choose a nameDr_Joseph_Phd,

Tynescos 18/09/2008 00:11:19

Banks will throw themselves further into the maelstrom by transferring their back offices to cheaper offshore locations.

Result: Newly redundant former-employees cannot pay their 125% mortgages.

That's progress.
4

,

18/09/2008 00:14:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
5

Willie,

Lochaber 18/09/2008 00:19:27
Having banked with them for 43years it is a sad day!
Yet were they in part to blame? Their profits over the last few years were obscene maybe a little of their legendary prudence might have avoided this disaster.
I hope now the FSA or government will put a stop to the short selling of spivs and speculators, theft if you or I was doing it!! I found George Osborne's comments on Newsnight fascinating when the Tory was clearly uncomfortable about criticising hedge funds. Cameron's new caring Conservative Party still looks after the greedy not the needy!!
I am sorry for the staff who face an uncertain future, and small shareholders who have lost out. For me I still have my savings, maybe the time has come to distribute them round various institutions or go to the whisky auction today and invest in real pleasure.
6

MB,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 00:20:35
This was all inevitable and was being predicted by some of the more astute observers of the market at least 2 years ago, if not more. Once we reached a point where you could go into your local bank branch and see nothing but ads for personal loans, credit cards, mortgages and consolidation loans instead of advertised savings rates, it was clear something had gone very wrong with the way banks do business. Mortgages at 4 or 7 or even 9 times the borrower's income should never ever have been allowed and yet at the time all we heard from the banking industry - and the media also - was that these were 'innovative financial products' that were intended to help consumers. How ironic.

I have sympathy for any of the average-paid employees at HBOS who will lose their jobs but I have no sympathy for the senior executives on large salaries and bonuses who created this mess. As for the unions asking for no compulsory redundancies and decrying corporate greed, where were they when record bonuses were being awarded and warped pay incentives were causing the banks to gamble with people's life savings? The unions, the banks, the media and the government have all been asleep on the job this time and it's the average small saver and worker who gets to pay the price.
7

Royster,

18/09/2008 00:20:49
Still not sure that it had to happen. A sad day for all. However the SNP's claim of an 'arc of prosperity' is looking a bit thin. Oil and HBOS were supposed to be the driver on an independent Scotland's economy. Oil is down some 30% and HBOS is now based in London in the space of a couple of months. Whether you like it or not, there is a real union dividend here as we are part of a varied, broad-based economy which can weather shocks.
8

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 00:26:58
6
MB
Aye of course, the unions could influence a merchant banks management policy.

So it's all their fault then eh?
9

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 00:30:16
Bill Jamieson of our very own Hootsman, made reference to there being a legal problem with BOS becoming extinct, and a poster on another thread had this to say:

"HBOS only has one banking subsidiary, Bank of Scotland plc. Halifax, IF, Birmingham Midshires etc are all trading names of the Bank of Scotland. There is only one banking license, the Bank of Scotland plc.

If Lloyds TSB does acquire HBOS, then it cannot close down the Bank of Scotland straightaway. An Act of Parliament is required to transfer the assets and liabilities of Bank of Scotland plc to another body. It is further complicated by the fact that Bank of Scotland itself is founded by Act of Parliament, and has the legal right to issue banknotes in Scotland. So the Bank itself is safe for a few years at least".

I don't know for certain whether this is correct, but something doesn't sit quite right.
10

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 00:32:08
Money makes the world go around,
the world go around, the world go around,
Money makes the world go around,
it makes the world go round.

A mark, a yen, a buck or a pound,
a buck or a pound, a buck or a pound,
Is all that makes the world go around,
that clinking clanking sound,
Can make the world go round.

If you happen to be rich, and you feel like a night's entertainment,
You can pay for a gay escapade.
If you happen to be rich, and alone and you need a companion,
You can ring ting-a-ling for the maid.
If you happen to be rich and you find you are left by your lover,
Tho you moan and you groan quite a lot,
You can take it on the chin,
call a cab and begin to recover on your fourteen carat yacht.

Money makes the world go around,
the world go around, the world go around,
Money makes the world go around,
of that we both are sure,.....

........On being poor!.
11

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 00:33:11
7
You have a one track mind Royster.

There is a financial meltdown, and that is somehow good for the union.

Would you like a picture of a straw?
12

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 00:37:39
10
Charles, sorry about the failure of the IVF.

But does DYW possess a bowler hat, stockings and a kitchen chair...?
13

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 00:46:10
12
The main Scots bank is the RBOS, their HQ is at Gogarburn, Edinburgh.

Err... the TSB Halifax IS the HBOS.

Look at the initials. Closely.
14

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 00:49:01
14
Good Morning Dan.

"Lets just give the bankers a break."

Just the one? Why not every major bone?
15

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 00:51:08
Royster

Is it a 'Union Dividend' for all of the main Scottish Airports to be owned by a Spanish Company? Or is that an EU dividend?

Is it a 'Union Dividend' for Scotland to hand over 9% of the TV license fee for 3% of the production?

Is it a 'Union Dividend' for us to pay for 50-odd MPs to sit in Westminster so that they can vote largely on issues that only affect England?

Is it a 'Union Dividend' for a Scottish Prime Minister to court those who live in England at the expense of his fellow Scots?

Is it a 'Union Dividend' for our country's oldest bank -around before the Union - to be shelved in 24 hours?

Is it a 'Union Dividend' for thousands of Scots banking workers to lose their jobs?

On a day when even he Scotsman calls it "the darkest..", you seem to take some twisted pleasure in calling it a 'Union Dividend". Sicko.

16

The Strategist,

18/09/2008 00:57:58
#14

NO! Lets not give the bankers a break. They along with their chums running hedge funds and private equity companies as well as the truly awful Govt in London have through their short termist, greed driven and strategically inept approach to business brought the economy of this country almost to its knees.

We should make it very clear to them and to the Govt that this intolerable.
17

,

18/09/2008 01:02:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
18

The Strategist,

18/09/2008 01:04:46
#19

If Scotland had been independent then it wouldn't have got into this mess in the first place.
19

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 01:07:34


Conan ~13,

Thankyou for your sentiments, it is very distressing, as are for some, the collapse of HBOS,

I can just imagine DYW dressed like you say, but,..

'Fish-net-stocking' and a glimpse of a thong, would sen my "shares" on an,..

'Upward Spiral' :))
20

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 01:09:11
17
"The Bank of England is only English in name, its gets it's money from the rest of the world, you can't dispute that surely."

I can make asinine comments too.

But mine are post-modern and funny. Sometimes.
21

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 01:12:35



El Gringo Loco, Al-Ikea,, ~27,

Stop talking sex, I have had none in the last 2weeks, incase DYW had been Pregnant!

It Would be a suicide 'job' if on top of this, I had lots of shares in the HBOS, :(
22

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 01:16:05
19 Richard1

Where do you get your figures from?

The 2006 estimate for both countries puts England's per capita GDP (PPP) at $38,000 and Scotland's at $39,800.

The top ten countries with the highest per capita GDP (with thanks to Col Blimp), and according to the IMF in 2007, were:

Luxembourg
Norway
Qatar
Iceland
Ireland
Denmark
Switzerland
Sweden
Finland
Netherlands

No large countries, eh?

23

Edward,

18/09/2008 01:18:48
#26 Richard1,
Sorry but it WAS a small group of Hedge fund managers
that 'borrowed' blocks of shares from certain institutions and short traded them that caused HBOS downfall
Everyone and there aunty knows this and Brown has done nothing to take action against them!
24

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 01:20:19




"No one knows all. We were challenged by a festering anger. The challenge was accepted. And in the end, the seeds of greed destroyed themselves. As they always do. As they always will."


25

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 01:26:42
25
You seem to have a thing about thongs.

Gie us your real age. A ninety-four year old in a thong.

Shudder.

I suspect you are a young cad of fifty.



26

Neil Waugh,

Old Strathcona 18/09/2008 01:28:54
If it's "Scotland's" best bank then shouldn't the Scottish national government have the final say. Not a bunch of greedy pr1cks on Threadneedle Street.
Salmond must order a 30 day cooling off period before any deal goes through.
Where's the idiot Labour opposition on this.
Oh, I foregot, they're "British."
27

somerferg,

perth 18/09/2008 01:33:22

#30 - Come on now old chap the Bank of England indeed the whole of Engerland has been funded by and keep floating by the oil of the shore of Scotland for the last 30 years. Were it not for that and the artificially created housing boom to make up for the destruction of any manufacturing base Engerland would have sunk beneath the waves of the Channel donkeys years ago.
28

Royster,

18/09/2008 01:33:43
#18. Andrew BOD. That's just obfuscation on your behalf. No one is suggesting the UK should be run like North Korea as you seem to be suggesting. Of course foreign companies will own some British companies. My point is that a broad-based economy is safer than a narrow economy. It may produce less spectacular returns but it is more reliable over the long-term and it is better for the people. Once again the Union has saved Scotland from disaster.
29

The Strategist,

18/09/2008 01:36:19
#26

I agree with #33. I would also argue that if Scotland had been independent already then this situation would never have arisen in the first place.
30

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 01:36:22
35
What is the word I am searching for Richard1?

Do not confuse the bull and bear market with the real economy.

Are we all going to starve because of this?

No.

Are overpaid and greedy people going to lose their jobs?

I hope so.

31

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 01:37:07
35 What good is a global bank if it collapses?
With the exception of Iceland, which of the countries listed is in a worse economic position than the UK?

England wouldn't have stopped us using the pound, Scotland's currency would now be Euros, affected by the sensible ECB.

London and Brown have increased the UK's reliance on the Financial sector, and contrary to what Brown says, this puts us in a WEAKER position than the rest of Europe.

HBOS should have been given financial assistance like AIG. However, Brown's poor judgement with Northern Rock meant he had no financial leverage left for HBOS.
32

Guga II,

Rockall 18/09/2008 01:37:26
Maggie Broon will get his place in history, as the man who destroyed the Bank of Scotland.

Plenty of help for Northern Rock, but nothing for the oldest bank in Scotland.

Born in 1695, killed by Maggie Broon.
33

BruBoy,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 01:37:53
This looks like financial suicide to me.

The combined company will have unfunded liabilities of £264 billion!

HBOS is currently finding it impossible to fund £197 billion from the money markets.

Let's compare this to the other big banks -:

HSBC - £10 billion surplus
RBS - £50 billion unfunded
Barclays - zero
Lloyds - £70 billion unfunded

Lloyds TSB is by far the least solvent of the big four banks.

What are these people thinking?

I've heard a lot the past few days about how cautiously Lloyds have been lending, with a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.43 I beg to differ.

Out of the five biggest US banks, none have a ratio higher than 1.08.

Lloyds-Halifax - 1.61

This can only end in disaster, I can't see any other outcome.

From too big to fail.....to too big to save.
34

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 01:38:43


Conan ~36,

Correct! +or- a few! :(
35

Sierra Foothills Scot,

Diamond Springs 18/09/2008 01:40:00
#4 Celtic4, USA -

The problem is with Halifax Bank of Scotland, not the Royal Bank of Scotland. Go back and read the article. The key paragraph is:

"The odds suggest that such a move on the Royal – some traders have mentioned HSBC to play the Lloyds TSB "rescuer" role – is pretty unlikely."

I hope this eases your mind.
36

The Strategist,

18/09/2008 01:41:08
#39

Don't be ridiculous. It's the union in the shape of the City, the Chancellor, the FSA and Govt which caused this mess in the first place. In particular it was Brown's refusal to include house price inflation in the figures used by the BoE to determine interest rates and the FSA's ignoring of the mortgage salary multiples which have done the damage.
37

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 01:44:26
42
Excellent riposte.

It's England's Gas.

That's a slogan there, you know.
38

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 01:47:11
Richard1 & Royster

BruBoy's post @ 45 makes for sober reading. Don't you get it? It's not sorted.
39

BruBoy,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 01:49:49
#49

They have £367 billion in total assets, of which £162 billion are customer deposits.

Their loan book is currently £229 billion. I'm afraid the figures in the above article are too simplistic to be of any use.

HBOS have assets of £681 billion but it's not done them much good.
40

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 01:57:07
52
Are you a Banker, BruBoy?

Or in any way involved with financial services?

Because Banker shall ever be a term of opobrium for me after living through the Thatcher years.

And I think I'm being proved right.
41

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 02:01:19
53 Read 43. I'm not repeating it.

What I will repeat is that being a global bank does not necessarily save you from financial collapse. In fact, you are more prone to short term speculation.

Anyway your point about Lloyds has been blown out of the water by BruBoy.

Also, overall GDP figures mean nothing. HSBC accrues most of it's wealth from the Far East.
42

BruBoy,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 02:01:40
Conan,

You are correct, although I'm obviously not a very informed one, as my transfer of funds from HBOS to Lloyds last week would indicate.

Ah well, looks like another chaps payment fee coming my way.
43

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 02:09:07
53
Your premise is so full of fallacies.

Why would not Scotland have a global bank?

It has two at the moment.

Once the taxes of Scots companies are levied in Edinburgh...well then lets see..
44

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 02:15:51
57
Personally?
A rope and and handy hook for the management.

Lamposts are much to high these days.
45

Royster,

18/09/2008 02:21:04
#45. Doesn't it depend on the maturity of the liabilities?
46

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 02:21:38
60
I do not understand your post.

Are you mistyping English?

Or covering yourself with old copies of the Times in a comfort seeking, let's prop up the sky, Rule Brittania kind of way?
47

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 02:21:59
57 Your hypothetical question is nonsensical. If England were independent of Scotland, the liabilities related to each sovereign country would be faced by by each government. England's liability would be generally ten times that of Scotland. Work it out. Before Lloyds takeover, it was a British plc with HQ based in Scotland but with 90% of it's customers in England. In the event of an independent Scotland, a different arrangement might have been taken with by two companies within the group.

You can't just say what if.. and pretend that you're right. It's mere hypotheses. Deal with the here and now. But I don't think that you can.
48

Royster,

18/09/2008 02:22:16
#31. Those figures are mainly skewed by exchange rates.
49

Royster,

18/09/2008 02:25:42
#64. The UK is a great nation. Why not celebrate it? UK banks now taking over Wall Street. Why? Because they have taken a broad-based approach. Headline should read 'Union saves Scotland once again'.
50

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 02:32:29
Does anyone know which institutions allowed their HBOS sahres to be borrowed in order to be short traded. It is all very well having these fancy scams, but it is not those who are playing this game who are taking the ultimate risk of the shares becoming worthless on bankruptcy, because we now have governments prepared to pump vast sums of taxpayers money in to prevent this happening. That is completely changing the ground rules. Short trading in certain types of businesses should be made illegal. I don't believe that honest institutions are doing this. I think it is international criminal money that is being laundered through the western stock markets. But it is not surprising that something was going to happen as America and Britain have been addiscted to credit, encouraged by greedy bankers and politicians who thought it was prospertity. It was all a house of cards presided over by a chancellor who was the emperor with no clothes. Gordon Brown will be forever remembered as the PM who presided over the worst banking crisis since the 1930s and caused the demise of the Bank of Scotland. The man is a Jonah
51

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 02:33:15
67
Yes lets celebrate a "Nation" that despises it's head.

Though the "parts" of that said Nation hate him for totally different reasons.

Straw clutching again Royster?
52

Royster,

18/09/2008 02:36:21
#69. Biting the hand that feeds you Conan?
53

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 02:37:25
70
I live in Scotland, Royster.

Do you?
54

BruBoy,

18/09/2008 02:38:40
#63, yes you're right, although the lending institution must take into account total liabilities of whoever they're lending to when deciding to lend or not. The other banks know exactly how much HBOS needs overall.

The exact figures are hard to come by, but I understand £100 billion+ is due in the next 6 months
55

Conan the Librarian™,

18/09/2008 02:48:36
70
No answer Royster?

56

Jobs4TheBoyz,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 03:08:50
It's sad to see the BOS get obliterated in one fair swoop. Blaming the short sellers is a nonsense. HBOS was always at risk and when you have BIG banks falling across the pond we should not be surprised to see that our own financial institutions will also take a jolly good brusing.

The loss of jobs from Scotland is always sad to see. Many technology jobs were lost after the technology bubble burst in 2000 and we never recovered from that episode. The credit crunch is a bigger bubble that will rid the financial sector of the ill, weak and in-firm.

However, there will be a small justice in there for some of the big earners who have enjoyed a relatively easy entry into the lucrative world of financial services based on where they went to school and who they play golf with rather than any real talent or capability to do the job.

The merger with Halifax was a warning shot across the bows at the time. Unfortunately, nothing was learnt and now we face the sadness of losing an important scottish corporation in the blink of an eye.

The Edinburgh property market may just experience the ripple effects of the HBOS bombshell. Although the Solicitors cartel will no doubt do there best to weather the storm.

Lloyds already owns Scottish Widows and they will simply swallow up HBOS in the same way. The loss of the corporate HQ function will only hurt the very same group that took there eye off the ball in the first place.

The King is dead. Long live the King. Life will go on!
57

William of Liberton,

EDINBURGH 18/09/2008 03:24:56
Interesting that Hornby is an ex-grocer, and that Thatcher was a grocer's daughter.
58

democracy,

Scottish Borders 18/09/2008 03:36:42
#39 Royster, HBOS was already part of the UK business setup, so you are talking total nonsense and as far as Lloyds/TSB are concerned it is in their interest to safeguard their own company by expanding because they know only too well that they themselves are also open to the vagaries of the present global financial climate.

As far as Professor Hallett was concerned on Newsnight Scotland the emphasis on the downturn was less to do with BOS and more to do with the 'H' part, as BOS directors were not happy about the way the mortgage platform of the company were moving and indeed some resigned over it.

They eventually were to be proved correct, but as far as the Lloyds/TSB takeover are concerned, word has it they will be called Lloyds/Halifax and drop the more astute part,the 'BOS'.

So Royster, is this what you mean by the Union dividend, typical of a fervent Unionist to come up with utter garbage like that and hang all the prospective Scottish job losses, who cares eh!
"The Union Dividend"!!!
59

Keith Lagden,

18/09/2008 04:10:05
How many times have they done the same to their clients forcing bankruptcy, They deserve everything that comes their way. Poor sods who lost their stock is a bummer. The directors should SFA in handouts.

THere are going to be a lot of people and failed business's rubbing their hands in glee at this outcome.

Ahhh revenge is a dessert BEST served COLD.

Let thi sbe a lesson to following the American Way. What ever happend to Scottish prudence.

Nuff SED
60

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 18/09/2008 05:19:32
Bye Bye HBOS, Hello Lloyds-Halifax.

Thats what happens when you let a glorified grocery clerk like Andy "Asda" Hornby run a bank. I guess he will have to go back to stacking shelves.

You don't need a crystal ball to realize all the head office jobs in Edinburgh are now toast.

All this speculation about RBOS is just that. RBOS is not nearly as tied to the toxic UK mortgage market. Look for the next bit of trouble amongst those with large shares of the mortgage market. Someone like Nationwide.

Or perhaps one of the Insurance companies with to much Mortgage backed bonds on their books.
61

Royster,

18/09/2008 05:24:55
#78. The union dividend comes from the fact that the bank has survived. At least for Scotland, it's better than going under.
62

,

18/09/2008 05:27:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
63

Madbagpypr,

STEORNABHAGH,LEODHAS,NA h-EILEAN SIAR 18/09/2008 05:28:12
I'm sure I read an article somewhere about speculations on a HSBC merger and it sounds grim.
HSBC are colostomy bags who don't care one jot about people. In fact they just had the rather dubious distinction of having one of the worst customer service departments in the WORLD.
I'm sure there's a couple thousand Indians in New Delhi that would disagree with that statement about their employer.
One Bruichladdich doon, one tae go.
64

Royster,

18/09/2008 05:34:52
But Mr Salmond is an economist. Didn't he see this coming? Surely, he could have phoned up HBOS because he is all-seeing and all-knowing.
65

TommyKaye,

UK 18/09/2008 05:36:00
Pensions Plundered, Stocks Slumping, Gordon's Dead-Hand

Some commentators (who should know better) warn that in these times of economic turbulence we should keep Gordon at the helm. It is a desperate line seized on and spun by his few remaining supporters. Who, they ask, knows the economy better than Gordon Brown? This is repeated so often you would think it a truism. Fraser Nelson pointed out some time ago that all Gordon knows about the economy is how to tax it. Look at how the stock market has performed during his chancellorship. Guido has pointed out before how much better other G7 stock markets have performed in comparison. Gordon's plundering of our retirement pensions to fund his profligacy has sucked capital out of pensions to pour into his social engineering.

In the ten years prior to May 1997 before Gordon got his hands on the levers of the economy the FTSE rose from less than 2000 to more 4000. After a decade of Gordon's stewardship of the economy the stock market has gone nowhere. Pensions have had no capital gains, what gains they have made have been taxed. During his time we have had the first run on a bank for a century. As the FTSE teeters at the 5000 level those who are retiring soon have a terrible future ahead, whereas at one time the British private pension system was a model for other countries. UK stocks under performance compared to other countries is partly due to Gordon looting pension funds to pay for current spending.


66

Royster,

18/09/2008 05:42:27
#85. Not a great fan of Gordon but the housing market saw 10-years of steady growth thanks to the independent Bank of England setting interest rates. People just got too greedy and thought it would last forever, including HBOS. This isn't Gordon's fault.
67

Royster,

18/09/2008 06:02:54
Good job the English don't have a government which acts 'purely in the interests of England'.
68

Abel Magwitch,

18/09/2008 06:05:51
At the best, Edinburgh will be rid of its overpriced restaurants and hotels and its preposterous house prices supported by the cheap money. At the very worst, the streets will be full of angry mobs smashing the windows of businesses which are thought to be English owned. Interesting times indeed.
69

Rebel,

South USA 18/09/2008 06:06:51
We are facing financial Armageddon here in the US due to politicians who give stupid voters anything they want as long as the stupid voters give the politicians their vote. Now the global financial meltdown - originated by the incestuous government/banking duo in the US - is bringing down Scottish banks. The US lost another brokerage firm Monday, (Lehman), so we have 2 left of the big 5. The government just gave AIG Insurance, (operates in over 100 countries), an $85 Billion "loan", (what a crock of crud!). And it is only Wednesday. Wonder what Thursday and Friday have in store for us?
70

Vaward,

Perth 18/09/2008 06:31:56
Perhaps Sean Connery, what with his profound patriotism and immense wealth, could make a bid to keep HBOS Scottish?
71

Phil1,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 06:37:25
18 Andrew BOD,Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 00:51:08

Andrew cannot get his SNP anti-English hat off even in a financial crisis. He would prefer HBOS to go bankrupt and fail as it would have done within days if no rescue had come from Lloyds-TSB.
72

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 06:40:37


GalacticCannibal ~82,

101% Correct Dude! and nice to see you back on threads,

One must remember, what we were all taught,....


Its like a 'Train'! your the 'Big Wheels' (the engine) in the US, and we the 'carriages', just follow suit, you slow, we slow, you stop, we stop, blah, blah, blah.

No point in crying, when the boiler-room runs out of coal,...

'Crocodile tears', Dont wash with Mama!.
73

Patrick O'Reilly,

Coatbridge 18/09/2008 07:02:17
At 1-24pm yesterday, the Blessed Alex was "broadly in favour of this rescue package". At 7-37pm, he was "firmly against this abomination". Seeking political advantage it seems.
74

Boy Wonder,

18/09/2008 07:03:39
So that's the price, eh? 12 and a half billion. A little more than the "parcel o rogues" got in 1707 ... but the result is the same.

75

Linda,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 07:09:23
Salmond is right. Brown and Darling have killed off Bank of Scotland and put thousands of Scottish jobs at risk.

Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling are to blame for failing to introduce measures against short selling and tighter FSA regulations 18 months ago after Northern Rock debacle.
76

Rabhairt,

Cannons Creek Australia 18/09/2008 07:09:55
#1 Angus. I second your question in your first sentence, a huge piece of Scottish history and pride gone, surely there must have been some erlier indication that things were not right, those at the top (THE FAT CATS ) will have to answer for it but probably as usual their Politicion friends will "see them right".
#Rebel the worlds largest insurer being bailed out with 85 billion of government money, once again who is responcible !!!! all of these white collar wankers should be brought to task because in the washup it will be the average citizens that cop the bill.
77

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 07:12:57
HBOS is a healthy bank with no problems in raising finance. This is not a rescue package as some have posted it is an agressive takeover at the expense of 25000 Scottish jobs.

78

Linda,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 07:16:12
The Stock Exchange should have suspended trading in HBOS to stop these Spivs from making profits on shares they didn't own.

Alex Salmond was speaking up for HBOS on Tuesday night and after the damage by Short Sellers was done it was sensible to support the merger as that was the only alternative left.

However this does not preclude criticism of Blair, Brown and Darling for failing to act 18 months ago.
79

Richard Taylor,

Aberdeen 18/09/2008 07:46:25
Some "union" dividend. Where London-based money men can bring down a Scottish institution because they fancy a quick buck.

Royster, Richard1, some "union dividend".
80

Royster,

18/09/2008 07:48:55
#101. It's better than a total collapse. BOS lives to fight another day.
81

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 07:52:47
103 Royster#

I am not sure if you are either stipid or more likely being deliberatly provocative with your juvenile sniping? HBOS is a secure bank with no problems in raising finance with profits of nearly £1 billion.

This is a takeover OK!!!! They want the secure stock and will get rid of everything else including Scottish jobs. It is NOT a bail out.

Bradford and Bingley next and every other major mortgage lender.
82

druidh,

edinburgh 18/09/2008 07:53:09
So - the HQ will be in Scotland (The Mound) and there will continue to be BoS notes....
83

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 07:57:54
Northern Rock could not raise finance and this was why it was going to collapse...HBOS has no problems raising finance.

Why are the government not issuing security on behalf of the bank (if that was what was needed) to safeguard the 40000 Scottish jobs.

Once again London benefits at the expense of Scotland (as well as the English losing their jobs and branches).

How anyone can look on with glee at this happening beggars belief...as for the snide comments at Sean Connery and Salmond it shows how truly pathetic many of the posters on here are!
84

P Rayner.,

Essex 18/09/2008 07:58:22
All this" history and Scottish pride" business is just piffle. HBOS is just a business, like any other, like the corner shop, no different. If it cannot manage its affairs satifactorily thats tough. Its about CASH, not about nonsense. Luckily for them, it seems, someone else might save their bacon. My only hope is that now as many jobs throughout the UK can be saved as possible. It gives not one ounce of satisfaction to me that blameless employees in Edinburgh especially, might, as is suggested, take the brunt of job losses.
85

carrottop,

Dumfries 18/09/2008 08:00:21
The Royal Bank of Scotland must now be protected at all costs, uncaring thieves and speculators are in the process of destroying our national identity. Bad enough to loose all our industry now the institutions that would care enough to help finance any resurgence in our traditional skills are themselves being picked of. Is this political in motivation as must severely weaken the effectiveness of an independent Scotland.
86

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 08:03:44
107 Rayner#

HBOS is not a 'corner shop' and it had managed it business very sucessfully, that is the point. This could all have been manufactured exactly so this could have happened..you don't just decide to take over HBOS in 2 hours for christ's sake..think about it.
This is a corporate 'business' takeover at the expense of an institution and jobs, larger banks squeezing smaller ones..and HBOS is not the last.
87

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 08:04:56
Scotland could be come the only country in the world without it's own bank or even a national supermarket chain..what a fu**ing joke.
88

Ken S.,

Reading 18/09/2008 08:06:05
There are many good reasons for independence.

However, it is hard to see how the consequences of a world-wide financial crunch can be blamed on the Union, as though an independent Scotland would somehow have been immune from it all!
89

Brodric,

18/09/2008 08:08:48
Richard1 - kindly shut your supercilious geggie and quit happily slobbering and cooing over the loss of a Scottish icon under less than transparent circumstances. We are not interested in your wittering and jibes at our ability to be an independent country - and let's face it, we would be better without people like you.

33 - Edward: "it WAS a small group of Hedge fund managers that 'borrowed' blocks of shares from certain institutions and short traded them that caused HBOS downfall. Everyone and there aunty knows this and Brown has done nothing to take action against them!"

Agree with you on this. No matter what else has taken place, including putting a former Asda man in the top job (weep for that for the policies that followed had more to do with retail than with real banking), the sharks moving in for the kill caused the final death throes. And this needn't have happened.

This shouldn't be happening.

Brown can't pull us out, UK taxpayers wouldn't stand for it and the party would lose further ground. But this inaction means that the Labour Party will be finished in Scotland, for turning its back on a historic bank - and is already floundering badly in England. Brown is caught between a rock and a hard place, facing circumstances which began before he took power and which he can't stop.

Hedge fund managers are the pits of humanity. There are companies and groups of people out there who have the financial ability and power to collapse a country. This should not be. We have to change something in the world - to spurn those organisations and groups - to ban them - and to move away from the greed and personal gain attitude that his grown in magnitude since the Thatcher days and you can see that people still don't want to change that. So long as they are winning.

What about the losers; the pensioners who might lose their pension fund. The thousands who will lose their jobs and savings. Why should a few sharks gain at the expense of the
90

Brodric,

18/09/2008 08:09:26
continued:

Why should a few sharks gain at the expense of the pain and suffering generated.

At the bottom line, this financial crisis has been generated by greed and personal short-term gain, rather than about what could be afforded and long term responsibility. The Bank of Scotland was not created on those principles - and its survival through so many crises was because it was based on prudency.

With the disappearance of the Calvinist work-ethic, so has our Scottish icon disappeared. I weep!
91

Edward,

18/09/2008 08:11:44
#111 Ken S
The difference is, if Scotland was independent, it would be in full control of its own treasury and have its own FSA, which would have made short selling illegal, as it is in the US
92

JT,

18/09/2008 08:12:43
I saw a billboard that advertised that Lloyds were increasing the number of branches in Scotland I guess by taking over HBOS thats how! Although the board have said that the Mound HQ and bank notes will stay, how long for???? Im glad I didnt move my account to HBOS a couple of months ago. As for the job losses it will be the people who actually make the bank its huge profits will lose out the people at the top will get generous compensation packages.
93

big is the new small,

18/09/2008 08:14:41
#7 royson

as i had to point out to you yesterday, yes oil revenues are down 30% over the past few months but are up 81% over the past year.

away with your scaremongering.
94

danbob,

18/09/2008 08:16:20
Richard 1# You sound like your gloating over what is a very sad affair. It's not a good trait. By the way when you asked whos coal Scotland uses in your rant at 42#, for your information scottish coal from Ayrshire is shipped down to the power stations of Yorkshire and Nottinghamshire at the rate of millions of tons a year to keep the lights on. Now please shut up.
95

camster,

E Kilbride 18/09/2008 08:16:38
As a business customer of BoS I can tell you it is a long time since the bank has been supportive of the local economy. After the merger with Halifax the bank became focussed on lending only against property assets irrespective of the cashflow to repay the loan. This strategy was doomed to failure when the property market crashed.

The Lloyds takeover is the least bad option. It at least prevents the massive destruction of value which would occur under bankruptcy. I am personally sad about it but my Finance Director has long since stopped caring what happens to BoS.

RBS is much better for local business and losing it would be a disaster for Scotland. Overall RBS was made from its acquistion of Natwest which occurred because of the Union.

One big complaint of RBS is that you cannot deposit money into a Natwest account from a RBS branch in Scotland which is stupid.






96

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 08:16:49
What a lot of ignorant nonsense on this page, starting at the very top with Bill Jamieson, who seems determined to talk this up into a worse crisis than it is already - as he was trying to do on Newsnight last night.

The hyperbole about Scotland losing its oldest bank is so much hot air - in case people hadn't noticed, BoS was taken over four years ago by the Halifax! It has no more ceased to exist this morning than it ceased to exist back then!

The blackest day in Scottish banking? What a lot of twaddle, from a man with what seems like a vested interest in talking up the problems and making them worse.

And to those in the comments claiming that, yet again, the answer to this like every other problem is independence - I despair at the idiocy.

I strongly suggest that anyone wanting reasonable coverage of the situation ignores this sentimental, rabble-rousing twaddle and instead read the FT or Channel 4 News, who seem to be the only news outlets with a realistic grip on what is happening. Even the BBC is caught up in peddling hyperbole. It really makes things far worse than they need to be.
97

big is the new small,

18/09/2008 08:22:02
#87 roysten

only because they are frightened of governing themselves. they need the steadying hand of a scot as they aren't confident in their own abilities.
98

P Rayner.,

Essex. 18/09/2008 08:25:51
NEVSKY Leningrad. HAD run their business successfully? Why then is it it that is about to be taken over and not it taking over someone else? The truth is the principles remain the same for a bank or a corner shop. Both designed to make money. Sadly HBOS have blown it, not good enough.
99

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 08:29:15
Duncan#

You are a prize idiot. There are possible consequences of 25000 jobs being lost as well as the huge damage that will be done to the Scottish Financial sector.

So just 'hyperbole' then? Idiot.

100

Mack1,

Carlisle 18/09/2008 08:31:36
When our erstwhile Chancellor make the Bank of England independent in 1997 he restructured the FSA and created a bureacratic and dysfunctional organisation that permitted Banks such as N Rock and HBos to engage in the mortgage paper chase. Brown also increased the money supply at 14% pa and this combined with banker's incompentence has led to the so-called toxic debts that has resulted in the demise of N Rock and Hbos.

Whilst mouthing the mantras of "stability" and "prudence" over the past decade, Brown has presided over the growth of so-called financial services whilst allowing one million manufacturing jobs to be destroyed. But, as usual when things go wrong for Labour, it is always someone else's fault. What a bunch of charlatans.

101

P Rayner.,

Essex. 18/09/2008 08:33:49
NEVSKY. Clearly you didn't read 119. It may be better before you call someone a prize idiot that you read what is written rather than reading what you want to read.
102

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 08:34:05
121#

HBOS has secured assets of £68 billion and have been bought for £12.5 billion...good business for someone.

I suggest you read the articles as you seem to be another ingnorant idion Rayner..HBOS IS a successful bank. try reading something before you post..stops you looking like a goon.

Concernes were raised regarding the short tern buying and selling of shares in banks over 2 years ago...this has nothing to do with a bank failing unlike the irresponsible disgrace that was Northern Rock.
103

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 08:39:20
124 Rober#

It's in the article above you bonehead..you another one with little electrical connection between the nerve endings of you peanut?
104

FTH22inarow,

18/09/2008 08:42:50
Shafted by barrow boys despicable actions, the largest bank robbery ever and no arrests, now Thatcherism destroys Scotlands remaining industry, RBS next?
105

Roscoe P Coltrane,

18/09/2008 08:44:21
Thank you SO much Halifax. By letting an ex-ASDA manager run a bank and by bringing in your incessant focus on short-term sales volumes and the short-term fleecing of loyal customers rather than long-term value, you've potentially killed off one of the oldest banks in the world.

Benny Higgins was binned for daring to suggest that we should concentrate on keeping our existing mortgage customers rather than pushing lending to people on a higher and higher risk profile. That's the Halifax for you!

I'm glad I got out when I did.

Greedy a55holes one and all.
106

Venerable Bede,

18/09/2008 08:44:41
Will be ironic if Goldman falls to the hedgies, since they act like a giant hedge fund themselves in many respects . Many of their more talented guys left to set up their own shops...which are currently busy shorting their own shares out of existence.

I suspect that the FSA will clamp down on hedgies now - at least, make them more accountable. It'll be a step backwards in terms of transparency, but one that looks necessary. Not sure how you can stop them simply moving offshore though.

As for it being a dark day for Scottish business - well, its not good news if a head office leaves Edinburgh, but, this does read like a local paper trying to get a local edge on a much bigger story..and missing the bigger point.
107

1745,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 08:46:24
Representative from Bell Lawrie last night said that there had NOT been much in the way of short selling, so how did this happen ?
G Brown once said he would do ANYTHING necessary to stop Scotland becomming Independent. Was that Clunking fist involved?
108

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 08:50:16
#122 Right, so you are quoting some of the hyperbole in the article back at me in an attempt to prove that the article is not full of hyperbole. An interesting approach, but not terribly effective.

Again, I would urge those who have reas this bizarre, parochial coverage to further improve their understanding of the situation by reading better coverage elsewhere, such as in the FT or Channel 4, or those parts of the BBC not obsessed with Robert Peston's powers of prediction...
109

Keithie Boy,

St Albans 18/09/2008 08:50:46
Eh. As one person commented, BOS can't be wound up as easily as you think. The complications within the Act of Union make this quite a challenge. Halifax found this out when they thought they could change the name of the bank and have their name on the notes. That's why HBOS is in back BOS with Halifax etc as subsidary trading names. You CAN'T get rid of BOS. Unless they decide to ignore the Act of Union which I think somebody might just spot..... BOS, at least as a name, is here for a while yet.... I think it will also have to have a main base in Scotland as per the Act. So it's gloom but not doom.
110

Jacqueline Hyde ,

On the shelf 18/09/2008 08:53:49
Well done, Peter Burt. I hope you now appreciate the true cost of your private wealth and privileges.

Most bank robbers go to jail but you knocked off an entire banking institution . . . and got a knighthood.
111

Marga,

Fife 18/09/2008 08:54:44
Why was Salmond not brought into negotiations or consulted? He represents the people who will carry the can for all this. Why did Brown decide on the fate of this bank, one of Scotland's emblematic institutions, without apparently seeking any Scottish input?

I hope people understand this and take action - a protest march or demo might not go amiss. Why wait for elections? Gordon Brown certainly doesn't ...


112

grahaminengland,

Ipswich 18/09/2008 08:55:42
Would Brown have intervened if the magic word "Scotland" had not appeared in the name of HBOS? Have you noticed that the banks in trouble - Northern Rock, Halifax etc - were all former building societies which demutualised giving bumper payouts to their directors.
113

gus1940,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 09:04:27
Is there no way that the merger of BOS & Halifax could be reversed to allow BOS to survive as an independent company.

In the recent Dutch takeover by RBS several parts of the business were sold off.

Is it not possible, given the monpoly concerns over the LLoyds TSB takeover, for our useless unionist government to insist that BOS be sold as a condition of the takeover.
114

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 09:04:37
#137 What? Seriously, WHAT? Grow up.
115

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 18/09/2008 09:05:34
Good riddance to Halifax - a cheap nasty brand with branches like circuses , ignorant badly dressed staff .
116

Mr Lahey,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 09:05:43
Some key facts.
HBOS had 1,058 branches and 46,700 in 2005. So that's an indication of what might go.
It took RBS three years to integrate NatWest and has currently soaked up all the best integration people for the Ambro integration.
A bank needs a banking licence to operate so BoS is safe for at leat two years. Politically the BoS branches may remain in Scotland but the HQ staff are centralised in S.East England and offshored.
The new group could package up and sell off a BoS Lite when the markets improve , which could consist of BoS's Scottish assets, Scottish Widows and SWIP. However such and entity would probably be bought out by an oversease investor or sold to Santander.
117

thistle do,

here n'there 18/09/2008 09:06:13
Funny how nobody worried when the greedy w/bankers were making their big profits and their bonuses.
Capitalism is flucked. Hope the red braces have taken the biggest hit but somehow the odious slugs will come out of it smelling of roses. What's Adam Appleworth up to now, could this be his time?
118

walter,

18/09/2008 09:07:27
HBOS has somewhere in the region of 22m customers which is somewhere in the region of 4 times the population of Scotland.
More people have their mortgages with HBOS than any other lender.
I am sure they are happy with this merger and the fact that the government are relaxing the competition rules in this case to allow this merger to go through.
Unfortunately in the financial markets it does not matter how stable a institution is when these things happen when there is a failure of confidence that institution will go under and no government can stop it.
Even the great and mighty A Salmond being the high protector of an independent Scotland would have been able to prevent it.
119

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 18/09/2008 09:07:38
May I say if we had our own Parliament this would never have happened . Of course SAlmond will exploit this collapse to stoke up hatred against England . Of course Scotland is a spiv-free zone . These people he refers to are a creation of New Labour .
120

Venerable Bede,

18/09/2008 09:08:07
#133 - indeed. You have to wonder how Preston got hold of this news, and perhaps investigate if any insider trading took place. There was no RNS on the story for several hours..not a bad rumour to have. The BBC needs to get a grip of itself and stop becoming PART of the story - as nick robinson and andy marr seem to enjoy doing as well.
121

P Rayner.,

Essex. 18/09/2008 09:09:03
NEVSKY. You seem to have a problem relating to other people, as evidenced by your penchant for name calling. Try to be a little tranquil, won't you? It might add to the debate.
122

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 09:10:38
133 Duncan#

Sorry Duncan but Scottish jobs (and English) will be lost and the Scottish banking sector will be heavily damaged, skills and expertise gone and probably a lot of Scots leaving if not the country then certainly the city.

That is not 'hyperbole' that is fact.

For you to to try and undermine the legitimate concerns expressed regarding the demise of a major national employer by tagging them as 'hyperbole' and 'parochial' is frankly not even worth discussing, end!
123

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 09:12:27
#146 Yep. I would describe myself as a big fan of the BBC, but I tuned in to some of their News 24 coverage last night and was shocked at the rubbish being talked. Newsnight was better, but Newsnight Scotland gave this idiot Jamieson far too much airtime to peddle his shock-story.

I don't think there's anything overtly dodgy about Peston, but the Beeb would benefit hugely from having some other eggs in different baskets.
124

Mr Lahey,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 09:14:48
Mr Daniels the new CEO has confirmed that BoS will keep HQ in Edinburgh and continue to print bank notes (there is actually a saving to be made by doing this)
Perhaps we need to look to Clydesdale for a model of how things may be? Its immediate parent and directors are based in London but the back office departments are all in Scotland as it’s cheaper.

I can’t see the new HQ being built in Fountainbridge now though
The real impcat will probably be in the North of England as is the case of Northern Rock.
125

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 09:16:33
#148 Scottish and English jobs were always going to be lost in this 'credit crunch' period. But why are you *still* talking in hyperbole about the "demise" of HBOS? There has been no such occurrence! HBOS still exists today, it is in no danger of bankruptcy, it will remain as a bank for the foreseeable future. The Lloyds TSB takeover has *ensured* that! And yet you describe this as a "demise". That is hyperbole, and it is deeply unhelpful.
126

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 09:19:02
150#

'Its immediate parent and directors are based in London but the back office departments are all in Scotland as it’s cheaper'

Very funny, sums up exactly Scotland status in the UK.
127

Nimrodel1353,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 09:21:02
It's a sad day for a venerable institution, but lets look at where the real blame lies.

When Bruce Patullo retired from BOS in the late nineties, he left Peter Burt and Gavin Masterton in charge. They wanted to show that they were big boys in their own right, and tried to set up a deal with Pat Robertson, bampot preacher from America. One he stated publicly that Scotland was 'a dark land, full of homosexuals', they backtracked, and had another look around. 'Ah, we could take over Nat West, a bank twice our size, they said'. However, they failed in this, and left BoS open to takeover - which it was.

I can only hope they're enoying seeing the value of their shares drop.
128

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 09:24:06
#152 Very interesting, demonstrates the real reason behind your hyperbolic exertions - Scotland as the victim, independence as the solution to every sodding problem. *sigh*
129

AJ Fife,

18/09/2008 09:24:41
I hope the Unionists are pleased with themselves! This is the REAL union dividend!
130

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 09:26:10
151#

Duncan..for the last time HBOS was a secure and profitable bank and was never in danger of being bankrupt.

The only thing Lloyds has 'ensured' is the loss of jobs in Scotland to boost it's own profitability.

The name 'Bank of Scotland' will dissapear forever and Scotland will be left with 1 bank...you consider all this a cause for celebration? It is exactly a 'demise'.

People who think the good news is printing a few 'token' notes with Scotland on them for 5 years as any kind of consolation are completely off their heads.


131

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 09:26:11
#155 Ah AJ! Right on cue! Now tell us how Alex would have prevented the global credit crunch had he only been allowed to run the world...
132

David C,

Sunny Fife 18/09/2008 09:28:12
This is what happens when you put a toy-boy from a supermarket in charge of a man's job.Not spent a minute behind a bank counter!! Instead, it's the old supermarket tricks, pile it high (mortgage debt) and sell it (the bank) cheap.
Banks should be run by bankers with years of experience, as used to happen.
133

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 09:28:34
#156 So you think that this takeover was unnecessary then? What do you suppose would have happened when HBOS was unable to establish short terms credit in the next few days?

And what makes you say that the name "Bank of Scotland" will disappear forever? There is no evidence whatsoever that that will happen.

You want it to happen because you want to blame the big bad Westminster government for it.
134

noswod,

Honestus 18/09/2008 09:29:11
You can't be independent without your own banks. Old Slamond knows this hence his spiv remarks. The overambition of HBOS has been breaktaking, but borrowing short to lend long and dodgy loans financing any PE deal going. The calvinista who where the backbone of this bank will be spinning in their graves. RBS will go to Barclays theres some irony in this. Scotland will as the rest of the economy kiss goodbye to the dream of living off financial services and its oil with two fingers to the Southern British. Will the last person please put the lights oot, oh dear the lights are already oot as we dinny have any power, naye Nuclear Power plants, naye coal, naye gas and the oils been hocked to save HBOS, still we can all depend on nice Mr Putin to save us with his free Gas plan.
135

Calum10,

18/09/2008 09:29:56
It now transpires that HBOS had offers from other banks that would have been better for their customers, High Street competition and would have saved their HQ in Edinburgh.............and the reason why these deals did not go ahead?...........Gordon Brown.

It was Gordon Brown who forced through the takeover of HBOS by Lloyds, and so thousands of Scots will now lose their jobs.

Way to go Gordon.
136

Who?,

18/09/2008 09:31:04
Can i ask why the hedge fund managers (there were only a few) who caused this mess are not named and shamed in the national press?

It seems to me that peodphiles, suspected terrorists and other unsavory types who cause widespread disgust regulary have their mugs and personal details published so why not the responsible hedge fund managers?
137

Marga,

Fife 18/09/2008 09:31:14
Vote as a consumer, vote with your money, change banks.
138

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 09:31:26
#161 Would you care to proffer any evidence for that statement?
139

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 09:32:35
154#

'independence as the solution to every sodding problem'

I have not said that anywhere so a rather clumsy attempt at diverting the argument with words i have never used.

Scotland is in real danger of being left with nothing, no banks, no supermarkets, no industry, no headquarters and no profits.

If you are happy with a second rate outpost for services within the UK then so be it; others have greated aspirations and protecting ANY countries assets is of fundamental importance.
140

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 09:33:20
#163 Oh god you just get worse. Do no such thing, unless you want to make a bad situation much worse! What good would a run on the bank do? Create another Northern Rock, only this time ten times the size? Force the UK government to bail it out and end up with the entire Western world in hock to China for the next 50 years?

Please, don't spread such thoughtless suggestions around.
141

Venerable Bede,

18/09/2008 09:34:05
156 - BOS disappeared when they were taken over by Halifax. The BOS name won't disappear now, just as it didn't then, for the simple reason that it still carries alot of marketing weight. On the high st it is likely to be the case that Lloyds branches in Scotland will shut as they will be pointless with all the BOS branches...but in English cities, where Halifax competes with Lloyds, two will become one.

Additionally, BOS in Edinburgh has some superb functions - Corporate, for example, is a really good unit...and the head office functions and facilities in Edinburgh (and its low cost Vs London) and high numbers of qualified people will continue to make it a major centre for any merged entity. Its not great, but certainly not the end!
142

MWM,

Argyll 18/09/2008 09:34:07
This has been deliberately orchestrated from No10 Downing Street to break up Scotland. What's the betting Brown and Darling are currently in talks with HSBC asking them to force the takeover of RBS.

I hope the gruesome twosome do not attempt to come back over the border, they will be the first against the wall.
143

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 09:36:55
#165

"Scotland is in real danger of being left with nothing, no banks, no supermarkets, no industry, no headquarters and no profits."

H-Y-P-E-R-B-O-L-E

Stop thinking parochially. This is a global problem. Consolidation in the banking sector was *inevitable* and this will not be the last piece. The key is to keep our heads, not run around screaming about the sky falling in.
144

AJ Fife,

18/09/2008 09:37:31
Spunky Dunc is a bit touchy this morning I see!

Ranting on about Mr Salmond and independence as per usual. I do like the fact that the very mention of the word 'unionist' sets him off! It makes for an amusing start to the day..........
145

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 09:41:54
#168 For pity's sake, stop it.
146

Fairfax,

18/09/2008 09:42:04
Who (162): "Can i ask why the hedge fund managers (there were only a few) who caused this mess are not named and shamed in the national press?"

Because they are not the ones who caused this mess -- they, and other traders, simply took advantage of the situation. There is no mystery here: HBOS became dependent on the wholesale credit markets for its expansion and, once the credit crunch began, they were living on borrowed time. In that sense, their fall has the same roots as Northern Rock and Lehmans.
147

Vaward,

Perth 18/09/2008 09:46:06
Stop making sense, Faifax
148

Fairfax,

18/09/2008 09:47:36
Nevsky (155): "Duncan..for the last time HBOS was a secure and profitable bank and was never in danger of being bankrupt."

The key point is your use of the past tense. HBOS depended on the wholesale credit markets to fund its expansion, hoping that the days of liquidity and cheap money would last forever. They didn't and, although its size preserved it for longer than Northern Rock, say, its demise has the same root.
149

The Strategist,

18/09/2008 09:48:50
Scotland needs one of these:

http://www.kiwibank.co.nz/index.asp

150

Doh,

18/09/2008 09:51:24


Greed is god.

After all the government interventions there will be calls for more regulation and some may even suggest that the banking sector should be nationalised.

My choice would be abolition of the stock market, for a long time it has been more about speculation than investment.

We need new forms of common ownership - partnerships, mutuals, coperatives, public-private corporations.

Looks to me as if Thatcher's Children are eating themselves.

151

Fairfax,

18/09/2008 09:51:50
grahaminengland (138): "Have you noticed that the banks in trouble - Northern Rock, Halifax etc - were all former building societies which demutualised"

Lehmans was not a former building society. However, your point contains some truth, for the following reason: building societies demutualised so that they could use the wholesale credit markets, instead of simply using their depositors' funds. Thus it's hardly surprising that they comprise an important section of those banks whose fall has been caused by the demise of the wholesale credit markets.
152

Venerable Bede,

18/09/2008 09:52:56
#172 - Actually, it is the hedgies that caused the ultimate demise. Yes, HBOS got fat on low credit, but it could have survived, were it not for the hedgies. It would not have gone bust, and actually had quite a bit of cash on its balance sheet.
Hedgies are extremely powerful...take a wander through Mayfair and have a look at where the newly registered ferraris and astons are parked outside! That's where your bank has gone, so to speak.
153

weh,

18/09/2008 10:00:11
Representative from Bell Lawrie last night said that there had NOT been much in the way of short selling, so how did this happen ?
G Brown once said he would do ANYTHING necessary to stop Scotland becomming Independent. Was that Clunking fist involved?"

1745-my thoughts exactly!
154

The Strategist,

18/09/2008 10:01:33
Haven't heard anything from the CBI in Scotland or indeed the boss of Scottish Financial Enterprise.
155

LesD,

Kirkcaldy 18/09/2008 10:01:43
#80 In case you did know The Nationwide is a MUTUAL Building Society and does not have shares, nor does it do any investment banking aor anything else particularly stupid.

Can I also point out that before it merged the TSB was in fact Scottish owned and still retains Scottish Head office in Glasgow.

I also think it is highly unlikely that the name "Bank of Scotland" will be allowed to disappear, it just won't be independant anynore, after all The Natwest still exists as does Abey National, Scottish Hydro Electric, Scottish Power to name but a few.

Also these companies are publicly traded on the stock market so they are all globally owned, not Scottish owned.

There is no such thing as a Scottish or British owned public company now.

Cheers
Les
156

VoteoutLibLabConTraitors,

New Cumnock 18/09/2008 10:12:43
The collapse of HBOS just highlights the economic policy of the government towards the credit crunch.
Blame it on America. Mention America in every interview and then bury their heads back in the sand.
The US didn't force British banks to buy their sub prime mortgages and it didn't force British banks to offer 125% mortgages to folk who couldn't afford them. It didn't set UK interest rates which helped to fuel the house price bubble either.
A year after the collapse of Northern Rock nothing has changed. The City is still allowed to short sell with Darling still saying he will look into it and get the FSA to tighten things up. The banning of short selling might not have saved HBOS but it would have given it a softer landing and so more time to get a more favourable deal with LloydsTSB or whoever.
The guarantee to protect £35K of savers money is still full of holes and offers no comfort to savers.
When would the money be paid out ? Within months is the latest promise. How would pensioners who rely on this money from week to week survive in the meantime ? And how do folk know what companies the banks own ? They might be over their £35K threshold without even knowing it . Banks could have put a list in their window of the companies they own to help savers rather than them scrambling around trying to find out. HBOS owns Clerical Medical which only adds to the confusion. Are endownments included in the £35K ?
For the average person the easiest thing to do in a crisis is just to take out your money and wait things out.
157

Fairfax,

18/09/2008 10:13:07
Venerable (178): "Actually, it is the hedgies that caused the ultimate demise. Yes, HBOS got fat on low credit, but it could have survived"

HBOS' share price was declining rapidly precisely because of the fear that it could not survive. All the hedge funds have done is to ensure that its end has been quick. In any case, much of the selling of shares will have been shares owned by other financial institutions, not hedge funds.
158

James.com,

18/09/2008 10:15:18
No more Scottish Banks? No more Broon and Bust!
159

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 10:23:06
#182 "For the average person the easiest thing to do in a crisis is just to take out your money and wait things out."

And yet it is also precisely the worst thing to do for your own, and everyone else's, prosperity.

"The US didn't force British banks to buy their sub prime mortgages and it didn't force British banks to offer 125% mortgages to folk who couldn't afford them."

And neither did the UK government!
160

Venerable Bede,

18/09/2008 10:23:35
Fairfax, the hedge funds are able to take short positions between them to such an extent that it actually forces fund managers in traditional (ie long only) funds to sell to limit their own exposure. They are powerful enough in their own right to make a fait accomplis. There are a number of businesses that have complained about the behaviour of hedge funds in this respect. You can argue that the price would fall anyway, but not as far and as fast as hedge funds allow.
161

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 10:32:05
I don't beleive the Bank of Scotland will disappear from the Scottish Hight streets or even operate under a diffierent name. The Clydesdale which is owned by the National Bank of Australia still exists under its Scottish name and issues banknotes.
There is no way that the Lloyds-Halifax Bank are not going to keep issuing Bank of Scotland bankbnotes and keep the Bank of Scotland profile north of the border. Only by keeping the BofS's separate status can they continue to do that. When the entity was HBOS it was not Halifax banknotes that stayed in circulation
162

Huntly loon,

Aberdeenshire 18/09/2008 10:32:06
I don't beleive the Bank of Scotland will disappear from the Scottish Hight streets or even operate under a diffierent name. The Clydesdale which is owned by the National Bank of Australia still exists under its Scottish name and issues banknotes.
There is no way that the Lloyds-Halifax Bank are not going to keep issuing Bank of Scotland bankbnotes and keep the Bank of Scotland profile north of the border. Only by keeping the BofS's separate status can they continue to do that. When the entity was HBOS it was not Halifax banknotes that stayed in circulation
163

DeeTillEhDeh,

China 18/09/2008 10:38:25
Banks - Scottish or otherwise - only care about money. Another one will come along, take our hard-earned cash and spend it as they please. Then p@*# off when the going gets tough, leaving us to deal with the mess.

164

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 10:38:34
'The new bank will be called Lloyds Halifax, raising concerns north of the Border that it will lose its Scottish identity'

The above is from the Times..the name 'Bank of Scotland' will go!
165

Nevsky,

Moscow 18/09/2008 10:41:51
lloyds are not going to maintain branches other than those of Lloyds Halifax. All bank of scotland ones will go, just why would they maintain Lloyds and HBOS ones on the same street..they have already stated that they will save $1 billion through branch closures and job losses.

Bank of Scotland is GONE!
166

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 10:45:51
#190, 191 Why are you so desperate for these rumours and suppositions to be true? Why are you running around telling everyone the sky is falling in? What's your motivation?
167

Venerable Bede,

18/09/2008 10:46:29
#189 - yes, damn all them banks for lending to us so we can invest in houses that have increased in price by multiples, and for their shoddy treatment of lending money to businesses who use the cash to shamelessly expand and create more jobs and pay more tax to the exchequor.

Something has to be done or we may all end up more wealthy, with a good social safety net paid for by increased tax revenue. Best we all live in caves.

For Sale - Lovely dry cave, extensive views, good schools and close to local amenities; better than the one down the hill that leaks, hence slightly higher asking price...oh damn, we're back to capitalism, aren't we?
168

tommy M,

18/09/2008 10:56:41
Why did Gordon Brown bail out Northern Rock yet do nothing to stop this when even Mr Mc Fall has gone on record admitting the bank was solid?

Gordon Brown seems to be in a rush to push this through and change the terms to suit.

i detest banks/bank charges/shortselling and greed as much as the next person but this is a damaging blow to the worldwide perception of Scotland's financial sector and it is horrifying that Brown has gone out of his way to orchestrate it.

i hope he cannot make his way into the party conference for protesters and hecklers.

i hope the people of Glenrothes turn away from him in droves.
169

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 11:08:45
#194 Your question "Why did Gordon Brown bail out Northern Rock yet do nothing to stop this" betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what has just happened, and it is no doubt fuelled by articles like this and Chicken Lickens like Nevsky.

HBOS was just saved.

HBOS has just been "bailed out". But without recourse to the public purse. This bailing out had a great deal to do with the government, who were instrumental in bringing the parties together.

Now it is undoubtedly the case that this merger will have ramifications on jobs, the market, and so on; and it will not be a silver bullet for the problems facing the economy. But neither would a publicly funded bail out have been, and it could have brought with it a major impact on the UK's credit rating, and been the precursor of far bigger problems.

The answer to every bank in trouble is not nationalisation. A merger (takeover) is another way of saving an institution, and it seems it has been reasonably successful.
170

Jaq,

18/09/2008 11:16:12
45# Oh so close to the mark. The countries go into a recession people panic,OH my god we need a solution what can save us,PROB=recession Crisis=everyone panicking, looseing jobs, loosing homes. Solution= Lets offer the Euro, we can sneak it in as the saviour of the economy! No one will protest much they are all to busy panicking about the cost of living or if they will have a job or a home. Wonder how long it will take untill this one is sneaked in and yet another step towards no true identity is made.
171

,

18/09/2008 11:21:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
172

,

18/09/2008 11:23:36
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
173

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 11:27:07
#197 I take your point, but bear in mind that when the Halifax demutualised all of its members became shareholders without necessarily choosing to be. Their money is sadly among that just p'ed up the wall. So I think a modicum of sympathy is in order.
174

guenevere,

18/09/2008 11:27:20
190. And so it should,the worst thing the halifax ever did was go in cahoots with the bank of scotland,
175

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 11:32:20
#201 Actually, it was the Halifax side of the business that brought with it the largest slice of mortgage lending. BOS on its own had far less exposure.
176

tommy M,

18/09/2008 11:34:38
Forgive my ignorance Duncan, but is it not fair to say the HBOS has been the victim of shortselling and mischievious speculators? And what did the Prime minister do about it?

And where is Gordon now? Don't see him out facing the cameras.
177

Scheme,

18/09/2008 11:40:22
I find it shocking to see Scots (of the unionist mindset) taking delight in the demise of the country’s oldest bank; their twisted logic seeing this as confirmation that Scotland could never go it alone. Rule Britannia, eh?
178

Grumpy,

18/09/2008 11:41:23
(119) - get your facts straight - HBOS was not formed 4 years ago - it was formed on 10th September 2001 - the day before the Twin Tower attacks
179

guenevere,

18/09/2008 11:44:13
203. It was gordon brown who approached the chairman of Lloyds TSB,so guess he did his bit.
180

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 11:44:58
#203 HBOS has just been bought by Lloyds TSB at a price considerably in excess of its closing market price. It continues to exist and trade. Everyone working there yesterday still has a job today. The deal was enabled by the UK government.

If your argument is that the UK government should have acted years ago to restrict short selling practices then why did you make the comparison with Northern Rock?
181

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 11:52:20
#207 Apologies. I don't think that counting error affects anything I said, however.
182

Gregor Addison,

Glasgow 18/09/2008 11:52:40
#206, Scheme,

I agree whole-heartedly with you. The sight of so-called unionists gloating over the loss of one of our most important institutions speaks volumes. We ought to remember that the Bank of England is state-owned and not prone to takeover. Rather than prove that Scotland cannot be independent, this suggests to me that independence is more urgent than ever. Scotland needs powers to protect its financial institutions.

#7 Royster, you wrote

"Whether you like it or not, there is a real union dividend here as we are part of a varied, broad-based economy which can weather shocks."

So you are sanguine about Scottish institutions being bled away to London? Exactly how is that a union dividend? Whether the work goes to London or overseas is all the same to the workers who will be losing their jobs in Scotland. The sign of unionists like you gloating over Scotland's institutionalised subordinate status is hardly inspiring. I'm afraid I'm not feeling that warm unionist glow that seems to stir you every morning.
183

Alan B,

18/09/2008 11:53:34
#Duncan in Edinburgh

"Everyone working there yesterday still has a job today."

No matter whether you agree with this merger or not one thing is for sure, it will bring about alot of redundancies.
184

Alan B,

18/09/2008 11:56:18
Brown has got to take his share of the blame. He changed the regulatory framework and it is that lax regulations that have allowed these banks to run a higher risk business model than is appropriate for banks.

Like most things Brown has done the stupidity of his actions are coming home to roost.
185

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 12:00:06
#212 Alan, I have never suggested otherwise. I am merely pointing out that there are Chicken Lickens all over this page - the worst being Bill Jamieson who should know a lot better - calling this the "demise" of HBOS when in fact it has been its salvation.

And I don't say that I am happy that it has come to this - but the point is that HBOS was badly exposed, and is now in a far better position. Consolidations, redundancies have all been on the cards for a long time, and it would be unreasonable to place the blame on this deal.
186

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 12:01:55
#213 The far greater share of the blame is with the banks who chose to take such risks. And not all banks did. HBOS took the decisions which led to this situation, not Gordon Brown.
187

Alan B,

18/09/2008 12:06:51
#Duncan in Edinburgh

"Consolidations, redundancies have all been on the cards for a long time, and it would be unreasonable to place the blame on this deal."

Do not know how you can say that. This deal would not have been allowed through if it had not been the mess HBOS had got itself into. As such i think there is little evidence that consolidations and redundancies would have happened. Many of the mergers had now happend anyway. Any future deals were more likely to be global or european.

Future redundancies were more likely if there was a sustained move away from the high street banking, with internet banks and phone banking. But it has not really happened yet.

I think you are being unkind to Bill Jamieson based on what you say he said. It is really the demise of HBOS at it has been taken over. Arguing that is not true is semantics. It is the demise of HBOS as an independent institution because of its failing business model. What structure it will take in the future really depends on future management and future banking trends.
188

guenevere,

18/09/2008 12:07:30
213. Not a fan of brown,but it was gordon brown who persuaded the chairman of Lloyds TSB to launch a takeover bid.
189

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 12:13:42
#216 Sorry Alan, you don't think that as a result of the credit crunch, consolidations across the entire banking sector were inevitable, and redundancies sure to follow? Do you think that the effective end of investment banking, as Lehman Bros goes, Merril submits to a takeover and both Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs are desperately looking for suitors is a completely unrelated issue?

There will be more consolidation, there is no doubt about that. Everyone has known it was on the cards since the reality of the credit shortage kicked in.

As for "demise" - please explain to me how the Halifax takeover was not a demise but the Lloyds one is.
190

Alan B,

18/09/2008 12:14:31
#215 Duncan in Edinburgh

The way I see it consumer/domestic banks are not like other businesses (and cannot and should not be allowed to fail). As such they should be low risk.

The government make the rules for banks in regard to their gearing (unless things have changed). It is important then that the government regulate consumer banks to make the low risk.

Brown when he took control changed the regulatory framework. Why? Becuase he thought there was a better way. With his new way we have seen the failure of 2 banks with HBOS not having to be bailed out.

If you change the regualatory framework and it fails soon after then you have to take some responsibility. From what i heard about NR it was a shambles. (atleast they have dealt with the HBOS issue quickly and decisively).

I think the US is probably even more responsible as with its regualatory framework aswell but we can only blame and do things we can control within our own country.

191

Alan B,

18/09/2008 12:18:15
#guenevere

I agree they seem to have acted decisively and effectively in dealing with the HBOS issue. Unlike the NR issue. For Brown that is a positive. You live and learn from previous mistakes.

My issue with Brown is to do with the changes in the regulatory framework that allowed banks to persue higher risk business models that were prudent.

I am not knowledgable enough to take any view on whether there are actions that could be taken on speculation, without having other damaging consequences.

192

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 12:22:36
#217 Yet again your argument drifts along leaving unanswered points in its wake as you ignore responses and focus solely on attacking the UK government.

The actions of HBOS were not controlled by the UK government. The fact that other banks have nothing like the same levels of unsecured debt demonstrates that the regulatory environment was not the driver for the risks HBOS took. Profit was the driver.

The regulatory framework has not failed. What has happened essentially is that credit has become significantly more scarce, liquidity has dramatically dropped, and those who were over-exposed have been caught out.

Personally I think the strategy of brokering a takeover for HBOS rather than attempting another nationalisation was probably the best that could be done in the sitution.
193

Alan B,

18/09/2008 12:26:55
#216 Duncan in Edinburgh

I was talking about consolidation of UK consumer banking institutions not investment banks and particularly US ones.

There has been such consolidation already with the consumer banking instituions i seem little scope for any realy increase in consolidation.

194

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 18/09/2008 12:30:42
Time we had our own Parliament at Holyrood to stop the English , eh ??
195

guenevere,

18/09/2008 12:31:17
Just to make my day perfect: The Conservatives have broken through the 50 per cent opinion poll barrier for the first time since the height of Margaret Thatcher's popularity. They have a 28% lead over Labour,EXCELLENT
196

Alan B,

18/09/2008 12:34:46
#221 Duncan in Edinburgh

I am answering any questions and stating what i think. That you may not agree with the answer is a different point.

I believe the government made a mess of banking regulations. You don't. That is a 2 different view points.

The reason I focus on the government rather say the institution is the government can effect things in the wider public interest.

I agree profit was the driver of the instituion but that is why i believe the government should have regulated the gearing of the banks. (as far as i know there is some regulation round this or used to be, think the tories relaxed it abit yrs ago).

"The fact that other banks have nothing like the same levels of unsecured debt demonstrates that the regulatory environment was not the driver for the risks HBOS took"

I would look at it the other way.

The fact that other banks have nothing like the same levels of unsecured debt demonstrates that IS the regulatory environment that failed to prevent the problems from irresponsible mgt chasing short term profit.
197

Alan B,

18/09/2008 12:36:00
#221 Duncan in Edinburgh

"Personally I think the strategy of brokering a takeover for HBOS rather than attempting another nationalisation was probably the best that could be done in the sitution."

Agree
198

Alan B,

18/09/2008 12:37:42
sorry should have been

The fact that other banks have nothing like the same levels of unsecured debt demonstrates that it is the regulatory environment that failed to prevent the problems from irresponsible mgt chasing short term profit.
199

guenevere,

18/09/2008 12:39:26
224. Oh come now,with an extra 22% of English tax payers money bolstering the Scottish economy only a fool would want independence.
200

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 12:47:48
#228 Please explain? Not following this.
201

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 12:54:20
#223 I have to disagree. I think we should expect a lot of the smaller institutions to be open to takeover, and be ready for more larger institutions to consider mergers too.
202

Tim C,

Southern England 18/09/2008 12:59:00
What puzzles me is that Enron went broke and loads of people were persecuted and/or jailed. Now some banks have gone down and governments are falling over themselves to rescue them. And the OFT, FSA and monopoly commission are silent; they know they are a waste of space. Let's hope the EU commission will put the stop on this merger or force a break-up when the dust has settled. Morrisons had to sell off stores when they bought Safeway, but it seems that banks can do what they like.

203

Alan B,

18/09/2008 12:59:51
#230 Duncan in Edinburgh

#228 was because of typos in 226.

What in 226 are you not following?

I believe banks should be low risk institutions (consumer banks not talking about investment banks). Governments set regualatory rules for these banks. ie how much money they should hold, gearing (atleast they used to), eg amt of desposits to loans etc.

While the banking institution mgt is primarily to blame for any failure we as the public cannot do anything about a bank. What we can do and what we should expect is for the government to regulate the banking industry to ensure that they do not fail. The banking sector is not a normal business and underpin the whole economy.

The art of running a solid economy for me is to ensure that we are prepared for when things go pear shaped. I think the government (Brown) has failed to do that. In many the same way with different things as Lawson who bought into teh concept the boom would go on.
204

Alan B,

18/09/2008 13:04:40
#231 Duncan in Edinburgh

Most of the smaller institutions have already merged as banks have grown bigger and bigger.

Leeds to Halifax, Halifax and BOS. RBS and Natwest. Midlands with HKSH. Lloyds and TSB. There really is not much scope for much more of that unless you wave competitiion rules. Yes there will always be mergers and takeovers but much or most of that consolidation had already taken place.
205

Alan B,

18/09/2008 13:08:12
#Tim C

People in Enron went to jail because they broke the law. This is down to lack of prudent mgt from certain institutions when global economic conditions turn sour.

What would you rather HBOS went bust and had to be nationalised by the government with public money thrown at it like NR. Or just to let the thing go bust and customers losing money.
206

Booster,

18/09/2008 13:09:31
It is a shame what has happened to HBOS but that is likely to be seen as a side-show very soon when runs on Banks really start to take off.

GDP growth has been based on hugely growing debt levels and inevitably the worlds FIAT money system can take no more abuse.
What is surprising is that it has lasted so long!

Watch out for hyper inflation, depression era unemployment rates and world wide political instability in the coming months and years.

207

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 13:10:21
#234 What I wasn't following, and still am not, is how the fact of other banks lack of exposure points to a failure of regulation.

I can understand your argument that stricter limits on debt ratios might be a good idea (although this is as profound a case of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted as I have ever heard) but I cannot see how the existence of a number of banks who have acted prudently points to a flaw in the current regulatory framework.

I don't think you are being fair at all to the UK government. The lion's share of the blame for HBOS's trouble lies with the board of HBOS.
208

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 13:17:27
#235 I think we have to set aside competition rules and look at debt and capital. The hard truth is that fewer banks that are stable is better than wider choice between unstable ones.
209

Alan B,

18/09/2008 13:20:00
#Duncan in Edinburgh

"I can understand your argument that stricter limits on debt ratios might be a good idea (although this is as profound a case of shutting the stable door after the horse has bolted as I have ever heard)"

Why? That is what I believe the government should have done. It has been discussed before i remember such discussions in the 80s where discussing gearing in banks and tory relaxation of these rules.

I do agree with you the government have done much better to act decisively this time and have learned from the NR mess.

"The lion's share of the blame for HBOS's trouble lies with the board of HBOS."

2 things.
1)these instituions work within the regulatory framework. If the government allow a lax position that allows higher risk business models companies will take advantage of that. But that is not in the wider interest.
2)While you can blame the mgt we cannot do anything about them. We can do something about the government.

In general terms i just think Brown has run a high risk short term strategy. High public sector deficits in times of decent economic growth. High and uncontrolled asset price inflation ie house prices. Which inevitably lead to high personal debt levels. The only thing he got right was the independence of the BOE as he sorted out britains poor monetary policy.

Sorry got to go for a bit.


210

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 13:27:17
#240 Ref your 2 things:

1) Only banks which are prepared to take the higher risks will take advantage of it! That's business! Higher risk means greater reward, or greater loss. But with the knowledge that the market has now of the effect of high gearing, you can be absolutely assured that any institutions with high gearing will be working very hard to reduce it. It is clear that those banks which didn't take that risk are in a far healthier position today. So introducing such a regulation now would not change a thing. The market has already learnt its lesson (though it will take time for it to adapt - as it would to adapt to new regulation).

2) That is a very very poor argument. Place blame where it belongs, not where it is convenient.
211

SimonHurrll,

England 18/09/2008 13:28:02
The inevitable decline of a Reputable Banking Name and Institution was indeed foretold two years ago by many in the Institutions and a Merger with another (bank) was also equally inevitable. It is just as well as the repercussions across the rest of the Financial Institutions in the UK in doing nothing would have been dire as the Morgan Stanley organisation or indeed others like the Alliance and Leicester and the Clydesdale Banks, etc. could equally suffer at the hands of the greedy ''Hedgers.'' One only hopes that when the dust (settles) from this ''Merger'' of HBOS and LloydsTSB that the huge £ Millions given as their parting ''mega-pay-offs'' currently envisaged for the Senior Heads who have been ousted from HBOS don't follow the similar sums recorded in other cases.
As for the ''Hedgers'' who have been able to by stocks at below market-price and sell when the market-price does not reach this lower level (this so-called ''short-selling'' system) we agree with all the sentiments stated here and elsewhere that it should be declared ILLEGAL. We have already seen the consequences recently where organisations like these including some of these same ''Hedgers'' have forced the price of Oil and Gas up to near $150 a barrel without a care for the consequences.
What a shame that there isn't a mechanism in place as suggested in the moderators of the share market to force these ''Hedgers'' to place real money behind their manipulative moves within 30 seconds of their actions: that would stop them in their tracks.
And what about taxing these ''Hedgers'' as though they were UK companies? That would also make them think again. (Perhaps though the UK Governments can't do this because most of these ''hedgers'' are not registered in the UK!)
212

Scottie,

South Africa 18/09/2008 13:43:28
I'm having difficulty understanding how this can have happened and/or believing this. So sad in so many ways!
213

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 13:51:37
#244 I take it you're buying into the lie that the "Scotland's oldest bank" has met its "demise" then?

Worry not! Be of good cheer! All that has happened is that one multinational has taken over another multinational at a reasonably good price because of some bad management decisions.

Please, please let's not turn this into one more thing for ex-pats to sing folk songs about.
214

Scottie,

South Africa 18/09/2008 13:54:35
#65, I'm fine with UK banks taking over Wall Street and others - if they do a good job and nothing like this is going to happen again.

I will mourn the loss of Scotland's banknotes :(
215

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 13:59:44
#246 How odd, since they will continue to be printed.
216

WKKB,

18/09/2008 14:05:39
#19 said: If this had happened under Scottish Independence the Scottish economy would have collapsed,the English would have bailed out their homeowners,Scotland would have seen the entire collapse of it's financial services,Scotland only has a GDP of about £120 bn,that is a drop in the ocean,you are not big enough to play with the big boys in finance as an independant country.

#24 said:#19

If Scotland had been independent then it wouldn't have got into this mess in the first place.

I have to agree with #19... we're simply not big enough to support ourselves. If we had enough money invested in our Scottish banks we might be ok but we simply DON'T and won't because we don't have enough amongst us to invest. The same with the NHS... we can't afford to support it on our own. We're a Great nation but simply not big enough like # 19 says to play with the big boys.

I wish it were different :-(
217

Scottie,

South Africa 18/09/2008 14:11:51
247 Duncan - and for how long will that be the case?
218

Alan B,

18/09/2008 14:19:06
#241 Duncan in Edinburgh

"So introducing such a regulation now would not change a thing. "

I am not suggesting it would. There are 2 things. How you react to the crisis. They have done much better here than with NR. And also how you regulate to prevent or minimise the problem.

Brown has failed with his regulatory environment. Because he changed it he has direct direct responsibility it.

"Place blame where it belongs, not where it is convenient."

I am not placing the blame where it is convenient. There are 2 direct areas of responsibility. Government for poor and lax regualation and the institution for taking advantage of that lax regualations. Both are responsible. But from the public point of view were can only effect one and that is the government. They must be held responsible for their own failings.

But as I also pointed out it is not the only area where they have been poor. Monetary policy excepted Brown has been poor in many areas. High public deficits in good economic times, high and uncontrolled asset/house prices, and from that high personal debt. This government have failed in so many of the basic areas of good governance.
219

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 14:25:54
#249 I have no idea. The idea that the 3 banks which continue to produce their own notes would be forced to stop is one which is raised with depressing regularity by people with little better to do. But since one of those banks is the Clydesdale, already taken over many years ago by the Bank of Australia, there seems to be no reason at all to believe that this takeover would result in any change.
220

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 14:27:40
#250 Yes you are placing blame where it is convenient for your continuing attacks on Gordon Brown's government. The responsibility lies with HBOS, from the public point of view or any other.
221

Steve,

Bo'ness 18/09/2008 14:32:05
It's absolutely sickening to see some Labour supporters in here trying to use this disaster as a way of undermining the SNP. Very poor taste.
For god's sake, people are losing their jobs. This is a tragedy for Scotland, not something to be celebrated as part of a wider unionist agenda.

But maybe that explains why Gordon Brown was so keen to see the end of HBOS?
222

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 14:39:47
#254 It's absolutely sickening to see some SNP supporters in here trying to use this disaster as a way of promoting independence. Very poor taste. For god's sake, people are losing their jobs. This is not something to be celebrated as part of a wider independence agenda.
223

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 14:48:10
#256 And yet, effective.
224

Alan B,

18/09/2008 15:13:18
#252 Duncan in Edinburgh

I am not blaming Browns government for convenience. I am blaming them because unlike you I think there are partly responsible due to the lax regulations.

And as said before I also blame Brown for much of the general economic mismanagement. Not because it is also convenient but becuase he is responsible. Like the big deficits in good times. Like the uncontrolled asset price inflation and the high levels of personal debt that has caused. (or even for much of the mess over pensions).

But notice i am also willing to say whether i agree with what he has done like independence of BOE as it is something i have supported since i became interested in economics in the late 80s.
225

Scheme,

18/09/2008 15:15:09
#248
Countries such as Norway, Finland and Switzerland are similar in size to Scotland and seem able to “play with the big boys” without getting a bloody nose.

Do you think it would make sense for Finland to rejoin Russia, Norway to rejoin Sweden and Switzerland to be carved up between France, Germany and Italy? Surely these three countries must also be too small – or does your theory only apply to Scotland?
226

guenevere,

18/09/2008 15:24:47
259. Having just visited Switzerland in july for my holiday,i can assure you they could not compete with their Austrian niegbour let alone "the big boys".
227

Scheme,

18/09/2008 15:32:41
#260

I beg to differ, I used to live in Switzerland and can assure you that the average Swiss resident enjoys a very good standard of living and quality of life.

Austrians seem to do ok as well though, without being annexed by Germany.
228

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 15:32:56
#258 Then you and I have an idealogical difference. I think that personal debt levels are down to the personal decisions of the persons who applied for the credit. You want a heavy regulatory hand over what individuals can and can't do at their own risk (similar to the regulatory hand you want over what companies can and can't do at their shareholders' risk).

I find your argument akin to those who complain that they were offered credit by their bank, and now they can't make the repayments, and they blame the bank for it. In fact they need to take responsibility for their own financial actions. No bank has ever forced anyone to take a loan. The consumer credit act requires full disclosure of terms and repayments and a cooling off period allowing for cancellation. Those who make bad decisions on the basis of full information have only themselves to blame.

As it is with individuals, so it was with HBOS.
229

Ken S.,

Reading 18/09/2008 15:38:47
I'm certainly no defender of Gordon Brown & Co, but there does seem to be an element of blaming the government for a much wider crisis brought on by that private sector that is supposedly so much more competent at doing things than the public sector.

It goes far beyond the role of hedge funds. Whilst I don't like their concept, they were not the major cause of present woes, so much as being one jump ahead at taking advantage of the situation.

Nowt to do with Scottish independence either, as financial institutions are so interwoven globally.

Quote from todays Telegraph:
"Imagine... unemployed .. man sitting on a crumbling porch somewhere in Alabama .. a chap comes along and says would you like to buy this house before it falls down and why don't you let me lend you the money?

Then .. mortgage is bought by a bank and packaged together on Wall Street with a lot of other similar debts. Somehow this package of dodgy debts stops being a package of dodgy debts and starts being what we call a structured investment vehicle.

I buy it .. then I will ring up Tokyo and say 'look I've got this package do you want to buy it?' and they say 'what's in it?' and I say 'I haven't got the faintest idea' and they say 'how much do you want for it?' and I say 'a hundred million dollars' and then they say 'fine' and that's it. That's the market."


And we all feel the effect when this thing goes belly up!
230

Alan B,

18/09/2008 15:51:35
#Duncan in Edinburgh

We may well have ideolgical differences but your examples does not show them. I also support personal responsibility.

I am talking about personal debt due to high and uncontrolled house price inflation.

The basics of good economic governance is -
- controlling inflation - Brown has done pretty well here due to giving BOE independence. Although as a poster pointed out to me, while monetary policy has been far better than before, we have been above the central target range for 90% of the time while remaining within the 1% range of central target. 9/10

- running a tight fiscal budget over the economic cycle. Brown after a good first 2yrs has been very poor. It is also worse than first looks as public sector pensions have not been fully funded (unlike the rules they correctly brought in for the private sector) and pfi. Including both of those means we exceed 100% debt to gdp ratio. When the tories ran deficits it was becuase of big errors. Brown has not such excuse he has just spent in the good times. 2/10

- controlling house price inflation. Brown has simply not tried to control house price inflation. As we learned from the early 90s when the market overshoots there will be a painful correction. Personally i would have wanted stricker regualations on amount people could borrow in mortgages per salary. Brown made all the wrong signals even wanting to include person property like buy to lets in pension funds until it was pulled for being to silly. 2/10

- personal debt (savings ratios) - while i agree with your regarding personal responsibility everyone pays if the economy is built on consumer debt. It is however a difficult thing to address. However most of it is based on property related debt and if the government had controlled house price inflation then this issue would have been far less. (remember also brown, smith and labour critising the tories for personal debt) 2/10 (because of inability to control house price inflation)
231

CLusterDave,

UK 18/09/2008 15:55:38
Wow, that is truly amazing. I have a feeling that this is just the tip of the iceberg.

John
www.anonymize.us.tc
232

Alan B,

18/09/2008 15:57:48
#262 Duncan in Edinburgh

Reread your post. Think you are confusing what i am getting at. I am mainly talking about personal debt caused by high and uncontrolled house price inflation.

By controlling the money supply ie the amount of mortgages. I would prefer regulation of debt to salary rather than just using the cost of credit (interest rates).

The whole thing was a ridiculous cycle. Poeple have to borrow more becuase of higher house prices. The more people borrow the higher house prices get. People then load into house price like buy to let for the quick money to be made and to cover for the mess of pensions.
233

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 16:07:54
#264 Textbook stuff. And I don't mean that in a complimentary way. Hindsight is 20:20.

Just out of interest, where would you have placed the cap on salary multiples for mortgages, and what would you have said to the banks and their customers who would have pointed out repeatedly over many years that you were holding back billions worth of potential business?

Be honest - no-one expected Northern Rock, and no-one expected HBOS. It is simply not reasonable to say that Brown should have known this was going to happen.
234

guenevere,

18/09/2008 16:10:36
261.When you are served "bread soup" as part of your evening meal,things must be tight!
235

Alan B,

18/09/2008 16:31:12
#Duncan in Edinburgh

It is not about hindsight. Most of this was predictable. Many have been saying this for years.

It is not hindsight to say:
- the government should run a tight fiscal policy. Brown even went on about his golden rule. Essentially that meant he would only borrow for investement over the economic cycle. What happened? He broke it even when times were quite good and fudged and changed the rules when breaking them. Now that the global economy has hit the doldrums his rules are complete blown away.

Even the EU are taking procedings against the UK becuase of what it calls deliberate fiscal irresponsiblity.

- it is not hindsight to say we should have controlled house price inflation. That was just completely irresponsible.

Again from the 80s I supported the removal of Thatchers barmey mortgage interest tax relief. Brown thankfully continued with Clarkes abolishon of it.

I would have set a rate of salary to mortgage level consistent with controlling house price inflation. Most people know inflation is a bad thing. Unfortunately the government have bought into idea that controlling asset price inflation is irrelevent if you control consumer inflation. I would tell the banks there are 2 ways the government will control house price inflation. Either price of credit ie interest rates. Problem with doing that is it hits the wider economy. Or you put quantitive controls in place. Allowing people to borrow at reasonable levels against income consitent with controlling house price inflation to me seem reasonable.

With regard to NR and HBOS the above things are to an extent irrelevent as they are my other gripes with Browns economic mgt. Although to an extent if you control house price lending then you would be in a better situation.

As i have said previously that problem is down in my view to poor regualation (aswell aswell as poor mgt). But if the deposit to lending ratios had been different then it would also not have fed into such
236

Alan B,

18/09/2008 16:31:51
cont..

... high property prices.

I agree it is classic textbook stuff. Unfortunately government ignore economic reality for short term polical gain or a mistaken belief in how the economy works.
237

Sedov,

Scotland 18/09/2008 16:34:19
Expect more shocks to the system over the next few decades as capitalism staggers from one crisis to the next. Who said that socialism is dead? - even the die hard captains of the monopoly have fear in their eyes. Away the REDS!
238

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 16:34:49
#269 Okay, what salary multiple would you have chosen, given your 20:20 hindsight?
239

Alan B,

18/09/2008 16:36:09
#Duncan in Edinburgh

re house price inflation.

Put another way do you believe that the government call to control inflation is good? I do that is why i support BOE independence and the targeting of 2% inflation.

Why then is it good for the economy to have house price inflation well into double digits? Has house price inflation not been something like 150% over the last decade.
240

Alan B,

18/09/2008 16:46:20
#Duncan in Edinburgh

It is not about 20:20 hindsight. People have said this for years.

I said I would put a ratio constitent with controlling house price inflation. do not have an exact figure but something like 2/3 times salary (maybe with deposit of some description).

I am not in a position to give exact figures as it is not my line and i would have to crunch numbers to come to a definite figure. But strategically that is what i would do.

Give you some other things:
- they were talking about 100 mortages not long ago. A house is only a affordable as the repayments. That is the mess we have got into.
- i know someone not earning much (teacher) with someone else who managed to borrow enough with someone else who also was not particularly well of, to buy 2 flats over 500,000 cannot remember the figures (was a copule of yrs ago) then sold them for not much less than 700,000.

We should never allow that sort of lending.

241

Alan B,

18/09/2008 16:49:06
#Duncan in Edinburgh

While not being against buy to let in principle i would look at it carefully when looking at the excess demand over supply that pushes up prices.

It would also be good to deal with lack of supply. But do not want to get into another area.
242

Alan B,

18/09/2008 16:52:12
#Duncan in Edinburgh

Any chance you will answer my #273 about why the government think it is a good idea to control consumer inflation but not house price inflation.
243

Wee Babs,

Edinburgh 18/09/2008 16:54:17
What a sad day for Banking and such a disgrace that the UK government allowed things to go this far. Thank God we have an honest first class economistas our First Minister. What a rock to have at the helm in these dark days for so many. Oh fellow Scots wake up to this call and realise that we must have honesty, strength and a control of this greed on the part of so many.
244

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 16:54:38
#275 Okay, okay. Let's say we had had a regulatory limit on mortgage lending of 3x salary. What effect do you think this would have had?
245

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 16:55:39
#278 Which honest first class economist is that? Oh, him? Honest? Blimey.
246

Duncan in Edinburgh,

18/09/2008 16:59:20
#277 That's a different question altogether! What you originally asked is whether I think it is a good idea to have rampant house price inflation. No, of course I don't. As to why the government think is is a good idea not to control house price inflation, that is a classic "when did you stop beating your wife" question. I have no evidence that that is what the government think, and quite a bit of evidence that they have been concerned about it for some time.
247

Ken S.,

Reading 18/09/2008 17:02:43
Union Dividend:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23557147-details/Brown+pledges+to+save+Scots+workers+%27in+bid+to+limit+political+fall-out%27/article.do

...Lloyds TSB explicitly mentioned in its takeover document that a priority was to safeguard jobs north of the border.

In an unprecedented move for a bank merger, the company insisted it would retain its Scottish HQ in Edinburgh, continue to print Bank of Scotland banknotes and that its "management focus is to keep jobs in Scotland".

The statement immediately sparked fears that HBOS's operating HQ in Halifax - where 6,000 people work - would bear the brunt of redundancies.

Mr Darling today admitted that he was worried about protecting jobs in his own Edinburgh constituency. "I've spoken to Lloyds TSB as well as to HBOS and I am extremely concerned about jobs," he said.



248

Alan B,

18/09/2008 17:07:08
#Duncan in Edinburgh

Not sure the exactly lending ratio as i said but the effect would be to control house price inflation.

The government targets cpi inflation at 2%, i would not have wanted house price inflation to be higher than say 5% (rather than the 15%).

Giving you another example mid 90s before labour were elected. Knew a girl that bought a one bedroom flat for 52,000 and sold 2 yrs later for 150,000.

The problem with rampant inflation means that everyone ones to pile in and make money out of it. Or the idea of borrow as much as you can becuase house price inflation means you will not be able to afford it later on.

The whole thing has gone mad.

With low and controlled house price inflation then the personal debt levels would not be so high. We would not have all this remortage to release more capital for spending etc.

In the general economy went a down turn hits we have 2 problems.

One the government cannot relax fiscal stance due to the already lax stance. With a downturn you will have lower tax revenues from vat, income tax and corporation tax etc (aswell as all the other smaller taxes like stamp duties and flight duties). (While i am not a Keynesian government can effect aggregate demand in a downturn.)

Secondly if the economy did not have such high levels of personal debt you would want to help cope with the downturn by allowing the consumer to spend your way out of trouble. We cannot do that.

It is really about being prudent when global problems happen.

Compare the economy today to the problems of the late 90s. The uk coped well due the the good economic fundamentals of the global asset and price collapse.
249

Alan B,

18/09/2008 17:12:51
#281 Duncan in Edinburgh

If the government were concerned about high house price inflation they did nothing about it. But by saying the government have been concerned for a while it shows that it is not hindsight.

They could have used the BOE to control asset price inflation. They set the narrow measure of only cpi inflation. (even changing the measure from rpi).

As i said that would not have been my preferred option. I would have used quantitative controls round the amount that could be lent both through regulation of deposit to lending ratios of banks and the amount banks could lend dependent on salary.

The government took the view not to try to control house price inflation. (Much like Greenspan did not control the asset price bubble in the 90s although that is much more complicated as we are talking in that case about share mutliples)
250

BK,

Cyberspace 18/09/2008 17:46:51
So Brown sat with this thumb up his bahoochie watching this happening ad did nothing. The man should be instantly removed from office and impeached for treason, standing by and watching his spiv pals destroying the economy. There is absolutely no doubt now who is the worst UK PM ever, buy a very, very long margin. It's just a pity he is Scottish. The friend of the rich, the crooks and spivs, and the enemy of his own country.
251

subrosa,

18/09/2008 18:26:32
# 257

Not effective, just ignorant.
252

Reader11722,

New York, New York 18/09/2008 18:50:36
The problem in Scotland is the same as the problem in the United States, paper money. Unbacked fiat currency is the root cause of these problems, especially in the US (add in the Federal Reserve and it is a farce). Paper Money, yet another infringement on our rights by the gov't. Add it to the ever-growing list of violations:
They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, Wikipedia and Facebook.
They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing at Gitmo.
They violate the entire Constitution by starting illegal wars without declaration.
Impeach them all (both parties) and save this great country.
Last link (unless Google Books caves to the gov't and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/Bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000083883
253

Martyk,

18/09/2008 19:50:19
BOS banknotes. Which is the only foreign bank allowed to issue UK banknotes?
254

Venerable Bede,

18/09/2008 19:54:13
I am absolutely NO supporter of Gordon Brown, but I think, given the situation at the time, it was the right thing to do for HBOS - the only other option was to suspend their shares entirely and then set about the hedge funds with baseball bats. I wonder why people lent shares they held to the hedgies when they could see what was happening? In my trading room people were screaming about HBOS all morning - at various points there was no bid price!!! tum te tum - its not the worst thing that ever happened though. No one has died and we've all had another jolly fun day. Wonder if JP Mogadon will be here tomorrow? tum te tum te tum.
255

Gavin Mitchell,

Fife 18/09/2008 19:54:59
It is a dark day for Scotland, the loss of its oldest bank… and the second oldest bank in the United Kingdom. The oldest being the Bank of England, interesting this was also founded by a Scotsman, William Paterson in 1694 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bank_of_England) - not that some of the English people commenting on here would know. Interesting how they think that the Bank of Scotland made its money from England, I think not. The Scots do not get subsidised by England and it’s about time the uneducated bigots of England (I do not mean the average educated and clear thinking people of England) got a bit more educated about what exactly Scotland contributes. The revenue from oil, whisky, banking etc. The Scots have been in the forefront of banking for centuries, just look at HSBC… again founded by Scots. But sadly yet again Scotland as in centuries gone by have been raped and pillaged by the English establishment. Sadly the TSB bank was stolen by the Conservative government from its owners… the investors, yes the investors. (founded by a Scottish minister, Henry Duncan in Ruthwell, Dumfriesshire and owned by it’s members… founded in Scotland in 1810 as a non profit savings bank with each branch managed by local trustees) this was sold of to Lloyds, yes theft from the people who owned it… theft yet again by the English Establishment, who privatised the bank in 1986. But as always we the Scots end up as the underdogs. Just look at what has happened in recent years... the army, the forming of a Scottish regiment ending the history of the Scottish soldier, the oldest regiment in Britain was Scottish (The Royal Scots, which was formed in 1633), now it’s English, but only because our heritage is stolen from us. Look at the futile wars we are involved in throughout the world… oh wars started by the Americans in per suite of control over wealth… oil and gas to be presise, as always the British establish meant becomes the lackey boys of the yanks and send mainly Scots regim
256

Venerable Bede,

18/09/2008 20:08:35
291 - Actually, some of the English on here would know that - and that BOS was actually founded by an Englishman! Anyway, as stated numerous times above, Scotland has no more lost BOS today than it did 10 years ago when Halifax "merged" with it (it was technically a Halifax takeover).
As for the rest of your post, I couldn't agree more! YOu Scots contribute much more than your fair share - and the last 2 years would have seen Scotland grow mega-rich from oil revenues.
And yes, the abolition of the Scots regiments was a terrible scandal of the most short sighted kind.
257

Venerable Bede,

18/09/2008 22:32:33
Hen Broon - Yes, I know that! I was responding to the previous poster who said that many English won't know that the Bank of England was founded by a Scot - I do know that, and I also know that the BOS was founded by an Englishman....calm down, pet. Or do you also sit around in jobbied pants chewing brown crusts? LOL!

ALBA GU BRATH!
258

Venerable Bede,

18/09/2008 22:36:45
hen brono is a total spastic inbred brother of kimba and threesome gal guenevere! LOL! ALBA GU UISGE BRAITH! And other false statements of Gaeldom.


259

Gavin Watson,

Hong Kong 19/09/2008 07:58:00
Where was the support for the Bank of Scotland? In the blink of an eye a credible banking force was allowed to fall into the hands of Llyods TSB - Unfortunately a combination of media frenzy, general panic and short selling (by little boys who were peeing in their pants) resulted in the loss of a solid institution, it was not deserved. It's a certainty Llyods will be champing at the bit to carve up the HBOS and specifically the Bank of Scotland - maximisation of profit at all times at the expense of all others. I didnt see any support for the Bank of Scotland from any side? Only that the acquisition - was a fete accomple and we must accept it for the better of the economy? What do the BOS say about that? Fair enough, Big Andy pushed the boat out with his business model, he should have known when to start to paddle back to shore - but he was greedy? Sometimes when you know the boats leaking, its not worth the swim back to shore? Too many sharks circling? Down with the ship? There will be years of debate as to why the HBOS business model failed - the model didnt fail itself, the poeple failed the model - no-one ever complains when they make money, its always a different story on the downside. Finally - Where was Big Andy when his customers were panicking? it would have been "prudent" for him to have made some form of comment/an appearance to allay their customers fears....that's a whole other story...

All in all - its a disgrace whats happened - people will look back to see the market over reacted and that over reaction was spurned by media and immature wee boys in search of personal gain. The City need's to be responsible for their institutions and those whom hide within them.
260

Gavin Mitchell,

Fife 19/09/2008 20:30:55
#304

Very true Gavin

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Should Scots be holidaying at home this year to help the economy?
Yes
No

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.