PDA

View Full Version : Bob Diamond and the Treasury Select Committee



Alf W
11th January 2011, 13:26
Anyone watch this this morning.

Link here (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/New-Barclays-Boss-Bob-Diamond-Tells-MPs-The-Bank-Is-Not-Too-Big-To-Fail---No-Decision-On-Bonuses-Yet/Article/201101215891127?lpos=Business_Top_Stories_Header_2&lid=ARTICLE_15891127_New_Barclays_Boss_Bob_Diamond _Tells_MPs_The_Bank_Is_Not_Too_Big_To_Fail_-_No_Decision_On_Bonuses_Yet)

The video clip of David Ruffley taking it to Bob Diamond is good. Ruffley insisting on a Yes / No as to whether Barclays were 'grateful' to the British taxpaper whilst Diamond treats him with well restrained annoyance. Don't know who it is sat to Ruffley's right but he has his head in his hand at one point.

TimberWolf
11th January 2011, 13:41
Didn't Jesus warn us about this?

scooterscot
11th January 2011, 13:47
I watched it.

Thought Bob gave a very good account and held is ground. If anything he came out the other side looking better than when he went in.

Did Barclays actually borrow from the British tax payer? I don't think so. So why would he by grateful..

I'm still of the opinion that those that headed the banks that near collapsed because of irresponsible risk taking should be punished. If I overtake a car poorly judged and crash, I die, I don't land with a golden parachute.


DAVID RUFFLEY - what a nit wit

Churchill
11th January 2011, 13:51
I watched it.

Thought Bob gave a very good account and held is ground. If anything he came out the other side looking better than when he went in.

Did Barclays actually borrow from the British tax payer? I don't think so. So why would he by grateful..

I'm still of the opinion that those that headed the banks that near collapsed because of irresponsible risk taking should be punished. If I overtake a car poorly judged and crash, I die, I don't land with a golden parachute.

There you go again, letting facts get in the way of a good lynching.

Would've been a good retort though...

"Actually we didn't receive a bail-out from the tax-payer."

scooterscot
11th January 2011, 14:12
I was hoping Bob would open up the meeting with something like:

How d'you do, I see you've met my faithful handyman
He's just a little brought down because when you knocked
He thought you were the candyman.
Don't get strung out by the way that I look,
Don't judge a book by its cover
I'm not much of a man by the light of day,
But by night I'm one hell of a banker

BigTime
11th January 2011, 14:23
I read a text summary of the proceedings but don't understand why he was there. Why the show trial? Does he just see it as a possibility to promote the shite hawk?

AtW
11th January 2011, 16:30
Did Barclays actually borrow from the British tax payer? I don't think so. So why would he by grateful..

Taxpayer bailed out counter parties - had RBS and LTSB fall down so would Barclays. Say Golden Sucks did not bail out from taxpayer... but they insured their losses via AIG which was bailed out and those bail out money went to Golden Sucks as well as other banks thus supporting them pretty much directly.

TimberWolf
11th January 2011, 16:36
Taxpayer bailed out counter parties - had RBS and LTSB fall down so would Barclays. Say Golden Sucks did not bail out from taxpayer... but they insured their losses via AIG which was bailed out and those bail out money went to Golden Sucks as well as other banks thus supporting them pretty much directly.

WHS. All banks are rolling in tax payers money. Kerching.

Bunk
11th January 2011, 17:07
Taxpayer bailed out counter parties - had RBS and LTSB fall down so would Barclays. Say Golden Sucks did not bail out from taxpayer... but they insured their losses via AIG which was bailed out and those bail out money went to Golden Sucks as well as other banks thus supporting them pretty much directly.

There's an argument that they invested in institutions they knew couldn't fail. Some would say that's a good investment.

scooterscot
11th January 2011, 17:50
AIG which was bailed out and those bail out money went to Golden Sucks as well as other banks thus supporting them pretty much directly.

Hold the phone. AIG bail out was not exchanged for shares like UK banks, it was just given free money by the US.

AtW
11th January 2011, 18:59
There's an argument that they invested in institutions they knew couldn't fail.

The fact that they had to be bailed out means they failed - so banks who insured in them also failed, but did not pay the price.

sasguru
11th January 2011, 19:02
Hmmm. Wonder what my bonus will be this year. Should have recovered somewhat from the piss poor £50K of last year.

Freamon
11th January 2011, 19:30
Hold the phone. AIG bail out was not exchanged for shares like UK banks, it was just given free money by the US.
Precisely, so the govt has no recourse or right to expect any special behaviour from the banks, as is the case with BARC.

If anyone should be getting angry, it's the taxpayers, with the govt, for carrying out the bailout in such a way that the taxpayer got nothing in return.

The govt feigning anger at the banks is just a diversionary tactic.

AtW
11th January 2011, 19:51
"Barclays is one of the single largest beneficiaries of the US government's bailout of AIG, it emerged today. It received about £6 billion, or the equivalent of the whole of the British bank's profits for last year."

"Of those, Goldman Sachs, whose former executive Hank Paulson was Treasury Secretary at the time of the bailout, was the single largest recipient of funds from AIG with $12.9 billion.

But, to the consternation of many American politicians, much of the money has crossed the Atlantic to settle AIG's bad bets with European banks.

Deutsche Bank and Société Société Générale were the largest recipients with $12 billion each while Barclays received $8.5 billion."

Source: Barclays got £6bn of insurer's bailout cash | Business (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-business/article-23662750-barclays-got-6bn-of-insurers-bailout-cash.do)

Alf W
11th January 2011, 21:00
"Barclays is one of the single largest beneficiaries of the US government's bailout of AIG, it emerged today. It received about £6 billion, or the equivalent of the whole of the British bank's profits for last year."

"Of those, Goldman Sachs, whose former executive Hank Paulson was Treasury Secretary at the time of the bailout, was the single largest recipient of funds from AIG with $12.9 billion.

But, to the consternation of many American politicians, much of the money has crossed the Atlantic to settle AIG's bad bets with European banks.

Deutsche Bank and Société Société Générale were the largest recipients with $12 billion each while Barclays received $8.5 billion."

Source: Barclays got £6bn of insurer's bailout cash | Business (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-business/article-23662750-barclays-got-6bn-of-insurers-bailout-cash.do)

and?

Barclays will have paid to insure those assets down the years. AIG should have been in a position to honour its liabilities.

AtW
11th January 2011, 21:07
AIG should have been in a position to honour its liabilities.

They were not, so they would have failed utterly and caused chain reaction, that's why they bailed out.

The only thing I don't get is how US Govt did not refuse to honour any non-US banks obligations, ie Barclays - they should have put AIG through bankrupcy procedure and selectively buy out at discounted prices all obligations - much higher discount for foreign banks.

Freamon
11th January 2011, 22:42
But, to the consternation of many American politicians, much of the money has crossed the Atlantic to settle AIG's bad bets with European banks.
Ironically, the branch of AIG that sold most of these swaps (AIGFP) was based in London at 1 Curzon St.

AtW
11th January 2011, 22:44
Ironically, the branch of AIG that sold most of these swaps (AIGFP) was based in London at 1 Curzon St.

A Curzon on both of their houses then :eyes

RichardCranium
12th January 2011, 09:16
A Curzon on both of their houses then :eyes:laugh :yay: