What Irish banks are not part of NAMA?
Permanent TSB anyway, not sure about others.
Is that just temporary or are Permanent TSB expected to ride it out without govt investment in its debt book?
I would have expected Permanent TSB to have been very exposed to the negative equity in the residential and commercial market.
Only reason I ask, is that I would recommend people opening accounts in those banks that wont have the government looking over their every move in the post NAMA apocalypse.
NAMA is only for commercial development lending.
PTSB did have exposure to the residential property market the same as the others so have been burned a bit there but they didnāt loan to developers.
They wonāt have any involvement with NAMA. Thatās set in stone at this stage and they have no eligible bad loans anyway.
They restructured in the High Court yesterday to separate Irish Life from Permanent TSB so expect PTSB to be merged with EBS etc or something. Govt will force this through possibly, not as part of NAMA because PTSB arenāt exposed there, but as a condition of extending guarantees. Thatās just an opinion obviously that last sentence but the rest of it is true.
NAMA is only for commercial development lending.
PTSB did have exposure to the residential property market the same as the others so have been burned a bit there but they didnāt loan to developers.
They wonāt have any involvement with NAMA. Thatās set in stone at this stage and they have no eligible bad loans anyway.
They restructured in the High Court yesterday to separate Irish Life from Permanent TSB so expect PTSB to be merged with EBS etc or something. Govt will force this through possibly, not as part of NAMA because PTSB arenāt exposed there, but as a condition of extending guarantees. Thatās just an opinion obviously that last sentence but the rest of it is true.
And for those with shares in Permanent TSB - what happens if merger with EBS or one of those go through? Given market value for your shareholding or what?
I donāt know to be honest. Maybe you just get to keep shares in Irish Life (which would be worth alot more in time).
I donāt know to be honest. Maybe you just get to keep shares in Irish Life (which would be worth alot more in time).
THe TSB side is worth fuck all, its the life company that has the value. If it splits youāll be left with shares in the life company
Surprised neither rocko nor bandage mentioned ulster bank
AIB, BoI, Anglo, EBS and Irish Nationwide are the participating institutions. That leaves PTSB and the foreign owned banks - most notably Ulster, NIB and ACC - as non-participating. Whatās your point about opening accounts KIB? Donāt really understand it.
Kib is recommending contrary to all popular thinking that the government backed banks are the ones to avoid.
Thatās what I thought.
Good to know. Have shares there from years back. Brother sold his few years back for ā¬21 a pop. Makes me feel sick that I was in such a drink/drug etc haze to have copied suit.
My argument is that - post NAMA etc it will be difficult for banks to operate with government interference ie banks will be less likely to give mortgages, overdrafts, credit cards to us mere mortals (with good reason as without govt interference they bankrupted themselves). Itās a point Jim Power refers to in his book, that history has taught us that it is even less likely, with govt interference, that banks will release credit to support SMEās etc that the govt have people convinced is the aim of NAMA. Also I believe that all has not yet been revealed when it comes to the banks balance sheets and that the govt may instruct the nationalised banks to concentrate on building up their balance sheets first rather than give out credit. Matt Cooper recently commented on Vincent Browne that no one would again invest in an Irish bank if a true inquiry was held, the panel agreed with him. This is what would seriously worry me for the long term future of this country.
(An example recently - My missus has a full time teaching job in Ireland but was turned down by AIB for a basic credit card despite holding a bank acct with them since she was 10.)
The banks free of NAMA imo once they have settled will be able hopefully to resume lending quicker than those under the watch of the govt and as such steal a march on their rivals if an upturn ever occurs again. For those interested in opening businesses, getting mortgages etc I think it would do no harm to get to know your NAMA free bank manager.
[quote=āKIB manā]Good to know. Have shares there from years back. Brother sold his few years back for ā¬21 a pop. Makes me feel sick that I was in such a drink/drug etc haze to have copied suit.
My argument is that - post NAMA etc it will be difficult for banks to operate with government interference ie banks will be less likely to give mortgages, overdrafts, credit cards to us mere mortals (with good reason as without govt interference they bankrupted themselves). Itās a point Jim Power refers to in his book, that history has taught us that it is even less likely, with govt interference, that banks will release credit to support SMEās etc that the govt have people convinced is the aim of NAMA. Also I believe that all has not yet been revealed when it comes to the banks balance sheets and that the govt may instruct the nationalised banks to concentrate on building up their balance sheets first rather than give out credit. Matt Cooper recently commented on Vincent Browne that no one would again invest in an Irish bank if a true inquiry was held, the panel agreed with him. This is what would seriously worry me for the long term future of this country.
(An example recently - My missus has a full time teaching job in Ireland but was turned down by AIB for a basic credit card despite holding a bank acct with them since she was 10.)
The banks free of NAMA imo once they have settled will be able hopefully to resume lending quicker than those under the watch of the govt and as such steal a march on their rivals if an upturn ever occurs again. For those interested in opening businesses, getting mortgages etc I think it would do no harm to get to know your NAMA free bank manager.[/QUOTE]
Strange logic.
Surely the Government is under extreme pressure to get the banks lending again to SMEs and free up credit?
Hang onto them a while yet KIB prob never get back to them levels but once Irish Life gets rid of the banking noose they should be worth a few more eurtles
[quote=āfarmerinthecityā]Strange logic.
Surely the Government is under extreme pressure to get the banks lending again to SMEs and free up credit?[/QUOTE]
Are they? The current Govt will be almost certaintly voted out at the next election so doubt they give a fuck about extreme pressure. Especially with the way OāReillyās rags have been backing them lately āLenihan rallies nationā was the main headline one day last week.
The banks are supposed to be lending out at the moment but are tighter than ever despite billions of recapitalisation already. The balance sheets imo need to be stabilised first before giving out any credit and if the govt are doing their job properly is what will happen. Hopefully Bob Honohan will ensure this happens.
Just think that when the wheel turns it wont be the NAMA banks that will be rolling it out.
[quote=āKIB manā]Are they? The current Govt will be almost certaintly voted out at the next election so doubt they give a fuck about extreme pressure. Especially with the way OāReillyās rags have been backing them lately āLenihan rallies nationā was the main headline one day last week.
The banks are supposed to be lending out at the moment but are tighter than ever despite billions of recapitalisation already. The balance sheets imo need to be stabilised first before giving out any credit and if the govt are doing their job properly is what will happen. Hopefully Bob Honohan will ensure this happens.
Just think that when the wheel turns it wont be the NAMA banks that will be rolling it out.[/QUOTE]
Maybe, who can say really I suppose but the way I look at it is that one of the main āhot topicsā out there with the electorate is freeing up of credit in banks. If they, as the taxpayer, hold shares in the NAMA banks then they can demand that change in Government policy - or theoretically should be able to anyway. No matter what Government is in power.
While there may be some merit in not opening a bank account under strict regulation likely to be there in the NAMA banks, is there not another argument that says strict regulation in terms of credit is good for the consumer as the unregulated banks were throwing money at people in the past which has resulted in negative equity etc.
[QUOTE=KIB man;305149Also I believe that all has not yet been revealed when it comes to the banks balance sheets and that the govt may instruct the nationalised banks to concentrate on building up their balance sheets first rather than give out credit.[/QUOTE]
Thereās nothing hidden. Everybody recognises that the banks need more capital. There will be an injection of capital, almost certainly from the State, in the near future.
I agree with your general point that banks free of Government interference are in the long-term interest of the country. I think most people other than the hard Left agree with that. Government interference has nothing to do with NAMA though, itās to do with the amount of shareholding the State holds and the bank guarantee (PTSB are covered by the guarantee). In the case of the two major banks (or at least AIB) the State shareholding will be over 50% after recapitalisation. There will presumably be a āthird forceā, mainly PTSB merged with the remainder of EBS and Irish Nationwide, that will also have significant State shareholding. Thatās a temporary necessity, and I would argue that at least AIB should probably be temporarily nationalised (or in an ideal world, turned over the bondholders). I donāt believe there is any residual value in AIB shares. I think the Government is currently of a mindset that it will try to divest itself of those shareholdings as soon as it can, but that will probably take a few years. However, once politicians have that kind of control, thereās a danger they wonāt want to give it up.
In the meantime, the Govt is in a quandry, because whatās good for the Stateās stake in the banks (not lending more money to floundering SMEs, much of which would never be repaid) is not good for the economy. There are no easy choices here.
Thereās nothing hidden. Everybody recognises that the banks need more capital. There will be an injection of capital, almost certainly from the State, in the near future.
I agree with your general point that banks free of Government interference are in the long-term interest of the country. I think most people other than the hard Left agree with that. Government interference has nothing to do with NAMA though, itās to do with the amount of shareholding the State holds and the bank guarantee (PTSB are covered by the guarantee). In the case of the two major banks (or at least AIB) the State shareholding will be over 50% after recapitalisation. There will presumably be a āthird forceā, mainly PTSB merged with the remainder of EBS and Irish Nationwide, that will also have significant State shareholding. Thatās a temporary necessity, and I would argue that at least AIB should probably be temporarily nationalised (or in an ideal world, turned over the bondholders). I donāt believe there is any residual value in AIB shares. I think the Government is currently of a mindset that it will try to divest itself of those shareholdings as soon as it can, but that will probably take a few years. However, once politicians have that kind of control, thereās a danger they wonāt want to give it up.
In the meantime, the Govt is in a quandry, because whatās good for the Stateās stake in the banks (not lending more money to floundering SMEs, much of which would never be repaid) is not good for the economy. There are no easy choices here.