Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#1
Blimey matey Barc.lays just announced 6 months profits of £2.98billion
thats a lot of gobstoppers you could buy!!!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#2
Not particularly large relevant to the size of the business and its capital.
Good to see a profitable bank though.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#3
up 8% on last year.still to much profit for one compnay,or should i say another greedy bank.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#4
Why is it in this country a British business makes a profit and we get whingers come out claiming nonsense like 'its too much'. What an appalling attitude here we are in a middle of a recession, most companies struggling to stay alive and here, we get this dreadful attitude when we hear of a success.
Barclays will only be on a position to lend to other, struggling, businesses if they are profitable.
We should celebrate the profits made by British companies, these profits mean taxes are paid and people have more secure jobs.
Guest 645- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 4,463
#5
Most of the bonuses will be paid out in shares spread over a number of years but I think the point is BarryW that the banks should only be allowed to dish out these bonuses once their debts to the tax payer has been met in full. Surely you must agree with that?
Marek
I think therefore I am (not a Tory supporter)
Guest 688- Registered: 16 Jul 2009
- Posts: 268
#6
I think we still need to look at how safe our banking/financial system Is.To me this Is just papering over the cracks and the spectre of Hyperinflation Is still around to haunt us
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#7
I should point out Marek that Barclays, the bank discussed here, is one that turned down government bail-out money as it did not want its hands tied. A good decision. I should also point out that they are relatively untainted by the poor practises that have damaged many other banks like HBOS and Nat West. The point you make is not relevant.
John - yes the root of the problem is a massive failure of the regulatory system since Brown introduced his tr-partied arrangement in 1997. This does need root and branch change, something Brown has failed to do, being unwilling to admit his failures.
You are also right about the risk of hyperinflation with the 'quantative easing', government debt and failure to make cuts in public spending. I am not quite as pessimistic as that though as I believe there is sufficient room for some of this to be soaked up and while significantly higher inflation is almost certain in 18 months/2 years I do not believe it will get to the double digit, hyperinflation levels.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#8
Barryw
yep that bloody labour govt fort they might be in there somewhere.
The HSBC is another that didnt go down the road of cash hand outs.,
I don't think anyone is against anyone makin profits, its about how they are used, i wouldn't want to see my bank payin out highly inflated wages which still goes on at the moment.
Customers come a long way down the list
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#9
barryw,barclys are not quite a british bank it has south african roots i think you will find.if these banks are making that sort of profit why cant they lend and support small and medium size busnesses instead of letting them go under for the lack of funds.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#10
Its a matter of history and fact, Keith.
Brian, the fact is its a British Bank and there are complex issues regarding the availablility of finance for which the level of profit is not of direct, only indirect, relevance. Businesses are assessed for finance based on risk, business plan, ability to service lending and so on. The availability of finance though has eased after first being hit about a year ago when the interbank lending dried up, partly as a protective measure.
I am actively involved advising small businesses and hence have some knowledge of what is happening.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#11
poppycock,the banks and there bosses want to line there pockets .
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#12
Brian
certainly the banks need to be more accountable
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#13
barclays provide free pens to fill out their forms with.
more power to them.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#14
Brian - blind prejudice is no substitute for discussion.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#15
Brian
1. Barclays is British
2. It is quoted on the London Stock Exchange
3. A large amount of its shares are held by pension funds or unit trusts or directly by small shareholders, all who benefit from the profit being generated.
4. All businesses have a fundamental duty to increase their value to their shareholders, which both these banks have done
5. Neither bank sought or took government aid so are under different obligations to Lloyds, RBS etc. who did seek government aid.
6. Bonuses will be paid as probably 30% cash and the balance in shares vested for different periods (2/3 years), so it is in bankers interests to maintain profitability over the long term. which is achieved through sensible risk management.
On a different note are these 2 along with banks like Citi, Goldman's, Mitsuho etc. too big to be allowed to fail by their regulators?
Probably yes
Is this a major issue for their regulators and home governments?
Again yes.
What should be done?
This is a much more difficult question, though we ought to consider the following:
Separation of retail/commercial banking from investment banking
Limits on market share in both segments to avoid monopolistic practices
Minimum qualification standards for directors (i.e. they must know something about banking)
Requirement to have a Risk Committee whose chair sits on the main board
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#16
HSBC now also big profits
but northern rock big losses
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#17
HSBC also did not seek or receive Government bail-out.
Guest 674- Registered: 25 Jun 2008
- Posts: 3,391
#18
yep yor correct this time baz as i said in recent posts!!!!!!!
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#19
The big losses with Northern Rock are likely to continue. The loss figure was announced this morning...I didnt take a note of it but it was around £270,000,000 and all paid for now by the humble taxpayer. It looks more and more likely that these losses will continue as this bank had a different philosophy to the others to a degree..ie they were huge on mortgages. The mortgages were of the high risk variety too, in that they loaned money to almost anyone who walked through the door.
They sold as many mortgages as possible, that seems to have been their only real commercial strategy. Having people with lots of mortgages on your books is fine economics you might say...but..only if all the mortages are paid back.
Where Northern Rock went askew was they loaned to almost everybody including those who could not afford to pay them back...particularly if times got tough...and times are tough.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#20
PaulB, this is not quite true.
Northern Rock had a higher risk business model than average because of the way it raised the finance to lend to house buyers. They relied less on a savings book and bought finance on the market. They were also not very diversified as a banking proposition.
I am not heavily into mortgages, not done one for over a year now, but I do remember that NR were not as bad as you suggest. They did have a sub-prime book and a self-cert book, certainly, but that in itself is not necessarily a problem. I dont have first hand experience of placing lending with them, not for a lot of years anyway, but I am not aware that they were necessarily among the worse offenders when it came to irresponsible lending. There were certainly a lot worse out there.