Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Independent HBOS fight 'gaining pace'

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: 17 November 2008
THE fight to save HBOS as an independent bank is still on, one of the two "banking knights" hoping to ride to its rescue told The Scotsman last night.
Sir Peter Burt, HBOS's former deputy chairman, said the battle to stop the proposed takeover by Lloyds TSB was gaining widespread support among shareholders.

Jim Spowart, a former HBOS executive, and Alex Neil, an SNP MSP, said at the weekend that
they had admitted defeat in the attempt to find an alternative bidder for the bank, and they accused the UK government of undermining their efforts.

But Sir Peter, who is campaigning to stop the Lloyds move alongside former Royal Bank of Scotland chief executive Sir George Mathewson, said analysis of figures in a circular put to HBOS shareholders last Friday had strengthened the case for its independence.

The circular from Lord Dennis Stevenson, the HBOS chairman, revealed that only an extra £500 million would be needed from the government to allow the bank to stand alone.

He said the £11.5 billion offered to HBOS as part of the newly merged bank would have to increase to £12 billion.

If this were to happen, the government would have a 59.9 per cent share in HBOS – marginally less than the 60 per cent of RBS it has taken.

In addition, Sir Peter said HBOS shareholders would get more than twice the 20 per cent stake they were being offered in the bank if it were to be taken over by Lloyds.

"Assuming these figures are correct, then it shows that the option of staying independent is still much better all round," he said.

He added that, in the long term, HBOS standing alone would be better for jobs, which would be put under threat by the £1.5 billion of savings proposed by Lloyds directors, and for customers, because of the undermining of competition created by the proposed superbank.

Sir Peter said it was "disgraceful" the HBOS board had not sought advice from the government on how much the £12 billion package would cost the bank. "If you had an estate agent who recommended that you accept a really poor deal for your house, and then said there was a second option but it was not worth asking what might be offered, then you would sack that estate agent pretty quickly," he said. "The same is true regarding this offer for HBOS."

He said he was still very optimistic of getting the 25 per cent of shareholders needed to block the Lloyds takeover at the bank's decision-making meeting on 12 December.

"In reality, only about 80 per cent of shareholders usually vote in these circumstances, so we need about 20 per cent," he said.

"We have been contacted by many shareholders who support our view, which is now being borne out by the facts."

HBOS itself reiterated that remaining independent was too risky, and it attacked Sir George's proposal to put himself on a new HBOS board, as he is still involved with RBS. He receives £75,000 a year as a consultant in an agreement dated 26 April, 2006, which runs until 31 July, 2009.

"You have to question whether somebody with such strong connections to a rival can take an important role in HBOS," a source within the bank said.

But the two banking knights have won tentative support from the UK Shareholders Association. Roger Lawson, a spokesman, said: "We need to see further details from Sir Peter and Sir George, but it does appear that it would be beneficial for many of the small shareholders that the deal does not go through."

He said that, as a Lloyds shareholder, he would be voting against the takeover because he was less than convinced by the board's recommendation that it was "the deal of the century".

Despite not finding an alternative bidder, Mr Neil said there were still many grounds for optimism. "Often last-minute deals come out of the woodwork, but I think many of our hopes must be in the efforts of the two banking knights. We should not pull up the white flag on this until HBOS shareholders have voted. You have to remember the board needs 75 per cent support for this deal for it to go through."

He and Mr Spowart were extremely bitter at what they saw as Treasury attempts to block their efforts.

"There is no doubt in my mind Gordon Brown was behind this," Mr Neil said. "He is so politically tied into this deal, and his credibility is so tied into it that he would not accept any alternative.

"There is no doubt in my mind that there has been a campaign of leaking from the Treasury. You only have to read Richard Branson's account of his attempts to buy Northern Rock.

"He says that before he had left the Treasury building, details of his discussions had already found their way to (the BBC journalist] Robert Peston."

Mr Neil added: "The other agenda here is to attack the SNP."

Mr Spowart insisted there had been an alternative to Lloyds, which had now, in effect, been scuppered by the Treasury.

"People are trying to brief that there was no alternative, but there was," he said.

He accused the UK government of briefing against him and questioned why Labour MPs and MSPs had stopped calling him last week. "The first question they always asked was who I had lined up," he said. "Clearly they wanted to find out."

Tavish Scott, the leader of the Scottish Liberal Democrats, said: "It's a disgrace what has been going on. This will be hugely damaging for Scotland and will cost thousands of people their jobs. I hope the redundancy notices have Mr Brown's name on them."

The UK government has refused to comment on the allegations it had scuppered the deal. But one Whitehall source said they were "outrageous and completely untrue".

The official line remains that the Lloyds offer is the only one on the table and offers the banking sector financial stability.

Q & A

Small shareholders have most to lose if takeover deal is given the go-ahead at twin meetings

What happens next?

Lloyds shareholders will meet to vote on the deal on Wednesday. More than 50 per cent of those present at the meeting need to agree to it for it to go ahead. On 12 December, HBOS shareholders meet; 75 per cent of them will need to support the takeover deal.

What about the extra general meeting to sack the HBOS board suggested by Sir George Mathewson and Sir Peter Burt?

This is unlikely to happen – it would require the support of 10 per cent of shareholders to call the meeting and the votes of 50.1 per cent of all shareholders, not just those present, to sack the board.

Is it impossible for another bid to come forward?

No, although it seems unlikely. Rival bids for companies and institutions have been known to come in at the last minute and if the HBOS takeover is really "the deal of the century", as Lloyds' board has claimed, then a rival bid cannot be completely ruled out.

What are the alternatives?

The main alternative is for HBOS to remain independent and to be nationalised, with the UK government holding a majority stake.

Wouldn't nationalisation be a disaster for HBOS shareholders and mean that they lose everything?

No. If the UK government has a stake of around 60 per cent that means shareholders would have 40 per cent in HBOS – double the 20 per cent in the new merged bank offered under the Lloyds deal. The value of their shares would improve as the banking sector picked up again.

So why are many institutional shareholders backing the Lloyds TSB deal?

Many of them have shares in both banks. In the short term they could gain more in their Lloyds shares than they would lose in their HBOS shares. It is small shareholders in HBOS, many of whom received shares when Halifax demutualised, who stand to lose the most.

Hotline offers help to those struggling as debts mount

A NATIONAL hotline is being promoted to help Scots facing debt problems in the economic downturn, it was announced yesterday.

ATMs will carry adverts for the campaign by the Money Advice Trust, which will also feature on TV and online.

Free advice will be given to those calling the phoneline in a bid to help people address financial problems before letting them spiral out of control.

The campaign has been backed with £382,000 of Scottish Government funding.

Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said it was important for people to be honest with themselves and seek help sooner rather than later.

Ms Sturgeon said:

"The main message we want to get across is for people to take control of their debt, before it controls them."

The National Debtline number is 0808-808 4000.

Government sources have strongly hinted that the Chancellor's Pre-Budget Report, to be delivered next Monday, will contain a fiscal stimulus package worth between £15 billion and £30 billion.

Low-income families have been touted as the biggest winners, probably through the tax credit and winter fuel payment systems.

Depending on how much was directed towards lowering taxes, the average family's bill could be cut by up to £1,000.

There is also expected to be a large increase in public spending, with Mr Darling having already gone on the record discussing help for the building industry in funding more public projects.

This would be funded through public borrowing, an approach that has been attacked by the Conservatives.

LUCY CHRISTIE

Chancellor set for early Christmas gift of tax cuts

A MULTI-BILLION-POUND package of tax breaks is expected to be Alistair Darling's pre-Christmas gift to taxpayers in an effort to stimulate the economy.

They have claimed Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, and Mr Darling are trying to "max out the credit card" at the expense of future generations.

Shadow chancellor George Osborne, who has been under fire for claiming there could be a run on the pound, ruled out either proposing "unfunded" tax cuts, or supporting the government's package when it is unveiled next week.

Mr Osborne said: "We are warning the country that Gordon Brown is abandoning fiscal responsibility and when a government does that it stacks up debt for future generations and stacks up tax rises for future generations as well."

He added: "The choice in British politics is going to be funded tax cuts from the Conservative Party, and a tax con by the Labour Party that has abandoned 15 years of rhetoric on fiscal stability."

Mr Darling refused to be drawn on the contents of his Pre-Budget Report yesterday, but strongly hinted it would include tax breaks.

He said: "When you are in an economic situation like this it is right to do everything you can to help people get through a difficult period, but it is also right that you do things that will help the country as a whole get through it more quickly."

He went on: "If this (package] is going to work here or anywhere else you need to do something decisively and you need to do it quickly so that it has an effect as quickly as you possibly can.

"At a time when the economy slows down, your tax receipts start to fall. If you then were to start cutting spending or trying to get more tax out of people that would make a difficult situation worse.

"So what you do is you support the economy by helping businesses and by helping people. But at the same time it has got to be sustainable in the medium-term, which means you have got to live within your means."



Page 1 of 1

 
1

Rufus T. Firefly,

16/11/2008 23:33:53
PIRC is the UKs' leading independent research and advisory consultancy which provides services to institutional investors on corporate governance and corporate social responsibility.

It has said HBOS shareholders should vote in favour of the Lloyds TSB takeover.

"Given the extraordinary circumstances that the company faces, and the commitment made by HM Treasury to act as a value-oriented party, we recommend voting in favour of the scheme of arrangement,"

"PIRC considers that the company has provided sufficient information about the acquisition and that the proposal was subject to sufficient independent scrutiny."

These guys are independent, unlike Sir George and Sir Peter who appear to have personal axes to grind.
2

Forward not Back,

17/11/2008 00:06:53
Again, why aren't they targeting LTSB shareholders? There is nothing in this deal for them.
3

Rasco,

17/11/2008 00:20:02
Rufus, Having seen and listened to Mr Spowart and what he had to say I would much rather believe him than any of your comments,and Mr Spowart is for the union so not trying to do things for the SNP.
4

Tris,

17/11/2008 00:27:10

Gordon brown will scupper whatever else there is. It's a done deal. He is going to save the union, just like he saved the world from financial meltdown. He's a hero, a superhero.

What does it matter if we lose a hundred thousand jobs or so, and we have no competition in our banking sector; Edinburgh ceases to be a respected financial centre, and the Scottish recession goes on for three years instead of one. We're only Scottish, we don't matter, and besides, it will do Gordo no harm at all with the English voters if he sets the dogs on us.

Have faith, Supergordon will sort it out. The second coming! Supergord.
5

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 01:01:36


"THE fight to save HBOS as an independent bank is still on"

Well it may still be,.."ON"...., but you Know and I Konw, it IS one that WILL be LOST!!

DOUBLE, FULL-STOP!

6

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 01:09:58


And BTW, the "shareholders" Won't care 'a-monkey's'

Why you ask?

Because their "shares" are now worth nothing, nothing atall!

Better for them to wait for the "take-over" as their, value in shares will undoubtedly increase.

7

Jock MacSprog,

17/11/2008 01:16:35
If every individual shareholder backed the so called "knights" they would still fail. Institutions hold more. There is no other bid on the table. No other bank wants HBOS. Any other commentary is fantasy. Move along people, theres nothing to see here. Stop beating this dead horse, its embarassing to Scotland and makes us look like incredibly small time fantasists.
8

George Coutts,

Not BAGDAD thats for sure. 17/11/2008 01:25:24
Independence is a loaded word that will FREE SCOTLAND frrever and a day.
A free and DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC that good hearted English Welsh and anyother genuine good person of any creed or religion may roam in peace in a brand new Nation.
Free from 300 years of TYRANY.
A new Scotland that will not send the BLACK WATCH to BAGDAD for Christmas,no you good boys and girls you will be too busy working in the NEW ST FERGUS OIL REFINARY.
No Monarchy to pay for, just PEASE and GOODWILL to out Free Nation. Roll on 2010 I´ll be VOTING.
George
9

Quinag,

17/11/2008 01:26:25
Hornby & Stevenson, sling your hooks! Having you two advising HBOS shareholders, is like having Burke & Hare arrange the funeral. You've both run HBOS into the ground. For God's sake, make way for Burt & Mathewson, who have concern for the employees & shareholders, & are not tainted by failure, as you two are.
10

SkeptikScot,

17/11/2008 01:51:27
If this merger does not go ahead then I'm a bananna. At least it will end the terrible uncertainty.
11

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 02:55:54


Like our hopes to make dreams come true, the reality of HBOS, spans back some 10years, the saying in our lives is,..'Que Sera Sera', like wise,..

http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/features/display.var.2468379.0.You_get_your_hopes_up_Youll_put_up_with_any_pain.php


12

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 02:58:52



Oops overshoot, try this one!

Like our hopes to make dreams come true, the reality of HBOS, spans back some 10years, the saying in our lives is,..'Que Sera Sera', like wise,..


http://www.theherald.co.uk/features/features/display.var.2468379.0.
You_get_your_hopes_up_Youll_put_up_with_any_pain.php

Copy and paste into browser or 'Google'




13

Another Saturday Night,

17/11/2008 03:26:59
Who would have thought there are so many financial experts reading the Scotsman.

14

Another Saturday Night,

17/11/2008 04:39:21
Germany and Japan now officially in recession.

No one has escaped the global meltdown.

What is interesting to me is the number of posters who are moaning about the situation now, but never commented previously when all the signs were clearly there.

Tough times ahead for all.

15

AB_R,

17/11/2008 05:47:15
"You have to question whether somebody with such strong connections to a rival can take an important role in HBOS," a source within the bank (HBOS) said."

This statement could also be about Andy Hornby and his £60k per month wage he has agreed with Lloyds.
16

Another Saturday Night,

17/11/2008 05:50:55
#21

Oh, has he been given a pay rise?

No...so nothing new, just new moaning...
17

Rufus T. Firefly,

17/11/2008 07:47:50
#20Another Saturday Night.

Yes Japan in recession now as well as Germany.

According to the NatZ on here its all Gordon Browns fault.

The next G20 summit is going to be in London led by the economic saviour of the world Gordon Brown. That will have Alex Salmond choking on his porridge.
18

Iain green,

Haddington 17/11/2008 07:47:57
if HBOS is purchased by Lloyds, then a significant number of high st branch jobs will go, as Lloyds already have a large presence there.
However, if HBOS stays independent,or indeed is had been taken over by, say, the Bank of China, then these jobs would have been safe.
Is giving up on our oldest bank, and losing several thousand jobs really an option for us at the moment?
Many of our pro Lloyds correspondents seem to think so.
19

Auld Twa,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 07:54:18
#1 PIRC independent ?
Quote from their site -
"PIRC is advising its institutional investor clients to vote in favour of Lloyds TSB's effective takeover of HBOS - declaring there has been "sufficient independent scrutiny" of the UK Government-brokered deal."
20

Another Saturday Night,

17/11/2008 08:01:30
RTF

Yes, as Salmond presses his flowers of Scotland along with his full length undershirt, the world moves on.


GB will be there at the G20. The man people want to listen to.

Salmond will be flicking the channels on his Logie Baird set to see if he can get a glimce.
21

ExpatNZ,

Auckland 17/11/2008 08:16:29
Remember who sold BOS down the river to Halifax --- PB!
22

Another Saturday Night,

17/11/2008 08:19:02
RTF

Bones, thrones and now....wait for it...bits of paper

Salmond is always all the ball when it comes to the "big issues"
23

Linda,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 08:44:30
Its telling that Jim Spowart who is said to be a Labour supporter is livid about Treasury and Jim Murphy leaks to the press of confidential financial information.

Mr Spowart insisted there had been an alternative to Lloyds, which had now, in effect, been scuppered by the Treasury.

"People are trying to brief that there was no alternative, but there was," he said.

He accused the UK government of briefing against him and questioned why Labour MPs and MSPs had stopped calling him last week. "The first question they always asked was who I had lined up," he said. "Clearly they wanted to find out."
24

,

17/11/2008 08:49:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
25

Melly,

Dunblane 17/11/2008 08:56:32
Brown & Darling are hell bent on the desctruction of all traces of the Scottish financial sector. It`s liebour`s scorched earth policy to destroy the country`s infrastructure to try to show that only within the union can Scotland`s commercial and industrial infrastructure be resurected.
26

bluehead,

edinburgh 17/11/2008 09:39:33
brown and darling are behind this mess,they are determined to sink Scotland,let us hope that the people won't forget this insult when it comes to voting time,this twosome gruesome are a disgrace to the Scottish people.
27

Voice of reason,

EDINBURGH 17/11/2008 09:43:14
14 - to judge from your spelling you are a typical semi-literate SNP moron . Thank god for England , the English are always welcome up here .
28

The Strategist,

17/11/2008 10:21:56
Those who are still trying hard to pull the wool over our eyes with regards to who is responsible for this economic mess are failing miserably.

There can be absolutely no doubt that in trying to "out Tory" the Tories by taking a highly laissez faire attitude to the activities of the financial services sector and indeed promoting that sector above all others, Gordon Brown can be said to have been both naive and negligent.
29

Jacqueline Hyde ,

On the shelf 17/11/2008 10:23:31
#33
Silly question. These people are bankers and everyone knows (or at least they know now) that the primary requirement in that "profession" is a total inablity as far as simple arithmetic is concerned.

The problem with the HBOS question is that there are so many lies, counter-lies, bluffs and counter-bluffs, the truth has been long forgotten. Whatever happens, HBOS won't go to the wall because the government cannot possibly afford to pay out its bank deposit guarantee. (It couldn't afford it when it was £35k so it certainly can't afford it at £50k - the recent increase was no more than a meaningless whitewash . . . hogwash is nearer the mark).

This meaningless bank deposit guarantee might even be responsible for the severity of the bank crisis in the UK because your "eminent knights" (and their ilk) always knew that, however irresponsible their actions, the government would be forced either to bail them out (which it is now doing) or to reimburse depositors under the guarantee (which has never been a financially possible option).

Many other business sectors (eg insurance and travel) provide customer guarantees but they do so through the resources of their own industry. If, under the promised "new order" of UK banking, the banking industry was forced to provide the guarantee for depositors - instead of relying on the taxpayer - we might just see some glimmers of competence, honesty and basic morality creep into the banking sector.
30

ricky40,

17/11/2008 10:26:54
35 voice of treason

Oh, wad some Power the giftie gie us...."
31

Godfather,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 11:13:08
............or maybe even "sic a parcel o' rogues in a nation...."
32

subrosa,

17/11/2008 11:35:32
# 27

I noticed in the photo taken at this weekend's G20 that your dearly beloved leader and saviour of the world's economies was pushed to the back row and not even the centre. Even Germany and France were more in the photo than your dearly beloved leader.

Speaks volumes about what his world-wide peers thought.
33

A Better Way,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 11:39:19
My God there are quite a few BNP posters on here today. The people with wee willies who are bold when they hide behind a made up name. Of course there is very little difference from them and London New Labour. They are both Neo Fascists that have little or nothing to do with the real world.

The real question is ,why any normal healthy of mind person, would support the loss of so many helpless Scottish Breadwinners Jobs and the welfare of their families.

I think the tone of their puerile vomit, says it all really. Go away you nasty little excuse for a human being, and seek some counselling. You are sick little bitter twisted sad people.

I,ll back a Scottish Way anyday that prohibited folk like you from being part of it.

Saor Alba, because we shall overcome whatever dirty little tricks that Westminster and its Anglo Scots throw at us. Just think, when Scotland takes its Country Back we shall be part of the G21, with full input into any decisions and No More London Controlled New Labour working to undermine our future.

I certainly hope the Folk of Glenrothes and Scotland read the comments by the few AntiScot Scots on this forum.
34

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

17/11/2008 11:51:30
This is the same Sir Peter Burt who presided over the Bank of Scotland's merger with the Halifax in the first place.

I trust himn as far as I could throw him.
35

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

17/11/2008 11:55:36
#32 What utter tosh. The people who have destroyed Scottish banking are the likes of Sir Peter Burt, Andy Hornby and Sir Fred Goodwin.
36

ricky40,

17/11/2008 12:16:58
41 subrosa

We unionists know that Gordon saved the world. It's true because I read it in the Scotsman, the Daily Record, Viz, Cosmopolitan and Reader's Wives. The Sun's Page 3 girls and the Labour Press Office can, and do, confirm this.
37

Ghengis McCann,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 12:26:19
CyberNats marooned somewhere out there in Hyperspace as usual.
38

Alan B,

17/11/2008 12:32:25
#The Federalist

While the bankers like Hornby have responsibility for the failure of the banks, I do think much more responsibility of failure of the entire banking system lies with the government in which Brown is directly responsible.

You can hardly say it was just the bankers fault if you follow Browns line that this is a global problem and not as people like me believe largely on made far worse by the economic ineptitude of the uk government which again given Brown was the person responsible for labour economic policy put the blame squarely at his door.

We elect a government to run the economy with stability and prudence in mind. When they fail so badly they must be held to account.

The underlying problem is if you have a chancellor who fails like any other department minister you sack them. Unfortunately we have one of the biggest failures of economic policy and labour have promoted him.

39

Alan B,

17/11/2008 12:35:54
#The Federalist

If you blame Burt for merging BOS with Halifax. And i agree that we should not have allowed this laisse laiffe approach to takeovers of scottish companies. We have to blame those who politically allowed it as they are our democratic representatives.

Under Browns management of the scottish economy he has allowed Scottish power and BOS to be taken over. I cannot see how losing ownership of our companies is in any was good for the scottish economy. Brown has not even tried to make a case for it. As such it is not surprising that people wonder why and what his motives are.

40

Kirk View,

17/11/2008 12:47:03
Maybe I am dense ... maybe I am missing something ... BUT was it not under George Mathewson's watch that the Royal Bank expanded into America and the sub prime market?

If I am incorrect and if his record at RBS was outstanding then all power to his elbow.

However if I am correct, then is he not being a little bit more than arrogant?

What was George Mathewson's record at RBS? Can somebody please enlighten me.
41

Darien,

Panama 17/11/2008 12:47:31
#23 Don't talk down about the "NatZ" as you refer to them. Remember, you are a NatZ yourself, a British NatZ. You and others may call yourselves unionists, but that is just another word for British NatZ. We are all nationalists, if we believe in a nation. Just a pity Britain aint, never has been, and never will be a nation.
42

Brian Hill,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 12:53:13
Spot on #21 AB_R: This statement could also be about Andy Hornby and his £60k per month wage he has agreed with Lloyds.

Full marks to our modern knights and all who support them. This takeover will be a disaster for Edinburgh, Scotland and the HBOS shareholders, it must be stopped.
43

Stirling Sentinel,

Stirling 17/11/2008 13:02:59
London is the best base for Banking and Finance. Get rid of the words "Scottish" or "Scotland" from Bank titles,and we may have some hope of redeeming something from the wreckage. Provincial banks are no longer the flavour of the month. Globalisation requires centres of excellence like London in order to survive and ultimately expand. Scottish Banks are toast.
44

Ewan Oosami,

17/11/2008 13:08:42
It's a done deal I'm afraid - the big shareholders hold all the aces. Although I, as a small shareholder, will vote against the takeover my voice will be akin to peeing into a gale.
45

ricky40,

17/11/2008 13:18:03
54 Stirling Sentinel

If London is the "centre of excellence" how come this country and, by extension, the population are getting deeper and deeper, and in danger of drowning, in debt.
46

noswod,

Honestas 17/11/2008 13:18:17
Mair Scotch mist, nay chance. Unless a real bank fronts up with a big bid HBOS is deed and Edinburgh as a financial centre is doomed. These no hopers who keep running up flags should stay in the pub where they belong and stop giving people false hope.
47

The Strategist,

17/11/2008 13:34:51
#54

Rubbish... Buy yourself a flight to Norway. Learn what regional banks can achieve when they work in support of their industry.. You'll be very surprised.
48

Sumlogic,

17/11/2008 13:40:47
"I do not "oppose" HBOS "independence". That would be like "opposing" gravity."

Taking a STAND usually means 'opposing gravity', and we do that everyday. Just because an opposing force exists does not necessarily mean giving in, Strength often comes from opposition to forces.

Its time the people of Scotland started backing HBOS with more than words, open new accounts and transfer your deposits from Lloyds etc.

Otherwise a big SIX-INCH nail will be driven into the heart of Scotland’s financial sector, jobs lost and incalculable damage in general done to banking and Scotland as a nation!

The union stitch up between Lloyds and HBOS has at its heart a covert political desire to weaken any chance of Scotland ever taking steps towards Independence by damaging peoples faith in Scotland and its business sector.

The Debt ridden UK Plc needs all the assets it can get...not the Scottish people mind you, just our natural resources...helps as collateral against the debts currently being pondered to give Tax cuts to the already wealthy South East of England.

Yes Glenrothes, we all owe you a sincere debt of gratitude for making G Brown head even bigger than before!

Enough talk, time for action from the Scots who are interested in more than just headlines.

49

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

17/11/2008 13:53:33
I have posted before about the different options that were/are available. I think it is worth reprising.

Take a level-headed look at the options that were/are available.

Option 1 - do nothing and let HBOS collapse. Letting the UK's fifth biggest bank and largest mortgage lender go out of business is never ever going to be a real option. I don't believe there are many here (bar Alan B) who would subscribe to this. As an option it is non-starter.

Option 2 - nationalise HBOS. Some comparisons with Northern Rock have been made here but it should be recognised that the route the government took was the last resort option. Although Northern Rock had a bid on the table from Virgin Money it would have meant further financial sweeteners from taxpayers' monies with no guarantee of any taxpayers' monies being repaid. Virgin's offer for Northern Rock makes LTSB's offer for HBOS look exceedingly generous. If no acceptable buyer for HBOS had been available then perhaps this route would have been examined. But the sheer scale of HBOS's cash shortfall - some £200 billion - makes this an extremely difficult choice to make.

Option 3 - get another bank or Scottish financiers to purchase the HBOS or at least the BOS part of HBOS. Ignoring the whole issue of the demerging the two business the truth is that there was never really another substantive alternative buyer to LTSB. Even Alex Neil recognises this. This option - if ever it were an option - is now dead in the water.

Option 4 - allow the Bank of England to let HBOS have access to the necessary credit (at commercial bank rates). That option too I feel is flawed. HBOS already had the option of going to the Bank of England to use a credit facility - but decided not to do so (why is another matter but that's a complete different line of debate). If it is not willing to use the existing credit facility why would it decide to use a new credit facility? Yet another option that I feel is a dead end.

Option 5
50

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

17/11/2008 13:54:10
Option 5 - LTSB merges with HBOS. From a purely public finances point of view this is a more attractive option. LTSB has been a lot more prudent in its activities and is relatively cash rich compared to HBOS so the liabilities of HBOS are no longer as threatening. The downside is clearly the possibility of job losses in the new merged business. However, having some jobs is clearly better than no jobs at all under option 1.

In an ideal world with a limitless pot of cash then option 2 is the most desirable. But we are in the real world where there is not a limitless pot of cash. Option 5 it seems to me is the only feasible option on the table. It may not be desirable but it is in my opinion the best of a bad bunch of choices. The priority for me is that the merger should be made as painless as possible for those on the receiving end.

One should also recognise that things are not set in stone. There is still scope for some sort of planned demerger in the future once credit markets and the general economic situation improve. It would not surprise me if that point the FSA asks LTSB to divest some of its interests - perhaps divesting the BOS part of the business would be a good start. But that cannot happen until the fundamental problems of the economy are tackled.
51

karin.m,

17/11/2008 13:57:47
labour are apparently according to the scotsman repealing the act of settlement


not according to one mr D cairns theyre not....

http://actofsettlement.blogspot.com/
52

,

17/11/2008 14:18:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
53

Westfield Bairns,

falkirk 17/11/2008 14:27:40
Gordon Brown the saviour of the world, er not quite, he was pushed to the back of the G20 leaders as they know he's always up for a bit of er*e licking. This takeover will go through as the loathed Gordon Brown and Nulabor are anti-Scottish, thats the simple fact of the matter
54

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

17/11/2008 14:32:21
#65 Pushing for a future demerger might have more chance of success than some of the other "alternatives" that have been proposed.
55

Jambo Dave,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 14:44:47
The answer is if this bad deal gos through and the headquarters are to be moved out of Scotland all BoS customers should move there savings ect to RBS and at least support one banking headquarter in the Gyle/Gogar.With luck the extra work will let some of the poor suckers let down BoS to be re-employed there.
A bad deal all round so dont forget when the time comes to place your cross in the box who had Scottish jobs at heart and we all know who dosent.
Brown should be dead meat for this.
56

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 17/11/2008 15:01:59
It's quote clear to anyone who has the capacity to read, that this merger is being pushed through by HM Govt, who are actively hostile to any alternative. Considering that whatever happens it will be helped by tax payers money, and that all analysis of the proposed merger indicates that it will be harmful to Scotland, those posters on here who support the merger must be masochists.
57

Beachcomber,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 15:24:00
One Central Bank for the World to replace the Dollar
Standard. Rone Paul

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article21241.htm
58

Beachcomber,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 15:24:43
#70 Ron Paul - sorry.
59

DHS,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 15:42:05
HBOS itself reiterated that remaining independent was too risky, and it attacked Sir George's proposal to put himself on a new HBOS board, as he is still involved with RBS. He receives £75,000 a year as a consultant in an agreement dated 26 April, 2006, which runs until 31 July, 2009.
As Hornby receives £60K each month from Lloyds doesn't that mean he should be kicked out. The HBOS board pick and choose what they want us to know. My family and I will remove all our accounts from HBOS if this deal goes through and perhaps a lot of the shareholders will do the same. What will Lloyds have then, a shell of a company
60

Alan B,

17/11/2008 15:52:55
#The Federalist

I have not actually proposed putting HBOS out of business. I am more wanting more information to make a decent judgement on the best course of action with some basic questions answered.

I have also suggested trying to consider something similar to the US chapter 11 bankruptcy rules to allow a company to refinance its debts to work it way out of bankruptcy.


As I understand it the problems are something like this, a bank has 150 billion mortgages funded by 100billion deposits and 50billion on the global credit markets.

The bank cannot refinance its inter bank lending and is therefore insolvent despite its asset basis. This is similar to the situation that even profitable business are finding themeselves in if there business model is based on overdrafts from the bank that are not renewed.

So the situation i want to see is. The depositors are looked after as the top priority. Shareholders get nothing or are last in the que. (With the bank bankrupt i would rather the shareholders got nothing and the government then saved 10billion on bailing it out. As they could effectively sell it to lloyds rather than us underwritting the merger and the value of hbos shareholders get the 10billion capitalisation.)

The bank then effectively defaults on the inter bank lending. As that would make it technically insolvent i want the despositors to get protected first. With massively more mortgage debt that depositors that is easy. The question really then comes down to the credit market lenders. They should be next inline but only after depositors. It is therefore in there interest to refinance there loans. They could even do an swap of loans for equity.

My real issue is who are they? Who are we really bailing out. Because at the end of the day the governments decision to save the bank has the result of paying of those institutions who lend to hbos to finance its lending spree. I have not idea if these companies are even british.

While my approac
61

Alan B,

17/11/2008 15:53:08
...
While my approach is obviously abit layman like. It simply looks at the problem and says that the lending well covers the depositors. So as long as they are protected then why spend and plunge the country into billions of pounds worth of debt.

There may be a good reason but that has not been articulated by any politician or economic commentator i have heard.

So my argument is not to let it go bust as you said but want to consider the approach of letting it trade its way out of bankruptcy. I realise the uk may not have these laws in place but many have been arguing for chapter 11 type laws for a while and we could /should have done something after the early warning when Nothern rock when belly up.
62

qohldr,

17/11/2008 15:54:25
If these people whoever they are have evidence that the treasury are blocking or the government are briefing against rival bids like they say is happening then they should be taking it to court.
These acts would be illegal under fair trading laws in Scotland, The UK and Europe.
The courts whether Scottish UK or European would be able delay the merger until all the evidence they have is heard.
Then when found guilty which they would be as these people have the evidence to prove such the merger would be halted.
Maybe they have not taken it to court as they do not have evidence that the treasury and UK government are acting as they claim they are as they ulterior motive for claiming they do.
63

Alan B,

17/11/2008 16:00:22
#The Fed

"Option 4 - allow the Bank of England to let HBOS have access to the necessary credit (at commercial bank rates). That option too I feel is flawed. HBOS already had the option of going to the Bank of England to use a credit facility - but decided not to do so (why is another matter but that's a complete different line of debate). If it is not willing to use the existing credit facility why would it decide to use a new credit facility?"

That is the other option i would like seriously considered. We need to know why this option was not used. I think there is alot more going on that we are hearing. Hornby had been talking for over a yr about this merger which he knew would contravene competition law.


I would also like to know about the other banks involvement in the dodgy practice Nothern rock got itself involved in. Where it held 50 billion mortage debt in an offshore uk childrens charity (with the children obviously getting no money) in order to avoid fsa regulation, capital requirements and tax. The sunday herald report on this said other banks were alos involved to more and lesser degrees and has said the government has buried this news.

So serious questions need to be asked. To what extend are other banks involved. To what extend did the government know? Why was this practise technically legal anyway? Was their law breaking?


At the end of the day much of what happens we need to take the government on trust. So whether you support labours actions will to a large extent depend whether you still trust them.
64

Rufus T. Firefly,

17/11/2008 16:05:03
Look at RBS today. Shareprice has dropped below 44 pence.

Jub cuts are rumoured to be as high as 30,000 staff.

HBOS is lucky it has Lloyds taking it over. If it was left to stand on its own 2 feet it could well go under, meaning that all jobs are lost.

The romantic notion of nationalising HBOS and everything will be all right is far from reality.

A further warning has come out from Citigroup today (who incidently just announced another 50,000 job cuts) who have been looking at previous European banking crises.

It said;

'a repeat of the past would see sector earnings wiped out and gross operating profit, loan books and deposit balances fall 30-60%.'

If that happens it will be catastrophic for the banks bottom lines.
65

antifa,

17/11/2008 16:08:03
"This takeover will go through as the loathed Gordon Brown and Nulabor are anti-Scottish, thats the simple fact of the matter."

It really frightens me that there are people this mad around. If Gordon Brown (a Scot) and Alistair Darling (another) wanted to damage Scotland, would they not simply allow HBoS to go to the wall? And why are they bailing out RBS?

HBoS (only half Scottish anyway) had a bad business model. The collapase of its share price showed that its existence was threatened. Lloyds came in to rescue it. It is the only serious offer on the table: the Treasury is not going to risk it by messing about with non-offers that have no money behind them.

Alex Neil? Please: keep this man away from our financial system - he's a numpty par excellence, and totally irresponsible to boot.
66

Alan B,

17/11/2008 16:09:03
#Rufus

Why should HBOS shareholders get a penny as the bank is virtually bankrupt?

If lloyds it to take it over why should hbos be valued at what is it 9billion capitalisation.

If the government simply tookover the bankrupt hbos and sold it to lloyds it would make the 9billion which would cut into the massive amount the government is pumping into the banks to bail them out.

Given that mortage debt massivly outweighs depositors who are we really bailing out. It is clear it is the lenders from the global credit markets. Who are they? Why are we bailing them out?
67

Marga,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 16:11:19
Federalist:

I find this sentence strange - perhaps brevity overtook logic (at least my logic): (Option 4):If "it" "is" not willing to use the "existing" credit facility, why would it use a "new" credit facility now?

1. Surely there is NO existing credit facility for a standalone HBOS, unlike all other British banks? There is no new credit facility for a standalone either, or have I missed something?
2. "It" is the HBOS Board, whose competence and motivation is precisely being questioned by Sir Peter and others - but not by you? Do you not feel the board should be questioned for past and present actions?
3. Did you not mean "was unwilling and inexplicably in changed circumstances remains unwilling"?

Finally, do you condone the bank's issuing of Corporate Responsibility documentation in 2007 in which shareholders, customers and employees are all called "stakeholders" while it now only recognises its obligations to shareholders and is silent about the rest? Where does that leave this or any bank in moral terms?
68

Alan B,

17/11/2008 16:12:05
#antifa

"Alex Neil? Please: keep this man away from our financial system - he's a numpty par excellence, and totally irresponsible to boot."

That remark is very apt for Brown. A numpty who has been economically irresponsible and incompetent.

Neil has never been in power for me to judge whether he would be good or not.
69

Marga,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 16:25:09
Federalist:

Have you seen this article by James Balfour in the Herald about a business banking solution to HBOS? This is an alternative. You do not advocate anything except the takeover. James Balfour is apparently well informed, as you are, what is your view on his suggestion?

http://www.theherald.co.uk/business/news/display.var.2468409.0.HBOS_business_banking_arm_would_give_a_legup.php

He says:
The UK Government should insist that the HBOS business bank is hived off from the corporate body and put up for sale to another bank with no significant presence in Scotland - or indeed a credible management team capable of attracting the required backing from public and private sources.

AND

For the Scottish economy, business banking is the most important part of our banks' operations. Personal banking is commoditised, relatively low-margin, increasingly carried out online and adds less value to our GDP than company growth, with its ability to add jobs, capital expenditure and tax payments.

So I regard the future of HBOS as being too important to be left to market forces, albeit forces supported by Government.
70

thistle do,

here n' there 17/11/2008 16:48:09
Merge or stay independant.... doesn't matter. The main issue must be to get rid of the arrogant, self opinionated, incompetent and deluded HBOS board. They should have no part to play in what now becomes of this once great institution. Until they go, and they'll need to be pushed, there is no credibility in whatever deals ae done.
71

Rufus T. Firefly,

17/11/2008 16:49:22
AlanB

In answer to each of your points.

"Why should HBOS shareholders get a penny as the bank is virtually bankrupt?"

The shareprice has been as high as £8.11 and as low as £0.59 in the last year. I believe the problem is that at the moment, nobody knows how much Hbos is worth. Are the shares worth zero? Are they worth more than Lloyds are paying? Nobody knows.

"If lloyds it to take it over why should hbos be valued at what is it 9billion capitalisation."

Once again, how do you determine the real value of a company? Is Lloyds overpaying or underpaying, how can one tell?

"If the government simply tookover the bankrupt hbos and sold it to lloyds it would make the 9billion which would cut into the massive amount the government is pumping into the banks to bail them out."

That is pre-supposing that the shares are worth nothing and therefore the shareholders get nothing. Once again who decides? Many companies can make huge losses for 2/3 year periods, and then come out the other side as profitable companies. I supoose the worry is that if Hbos collapses it takes down the whole financial system with it.


"Given that mortage debt massivly outweighs depositors who are we really bailing out. It is clear it is the lenders from the global credit markets. Who are they? Why are we bailing them out?"

Yes but dont forget that Hbos is a much bigger business than that. It owns insurance companies, Life Assurance companies, property companies etc.
72

Alan B,

17/11/2008 17:10:14
#Rufus

HBOS is bankrupt as far as i can tell without government bail outs. As such i would say it is not worth a penny.

If say the government did not pump money in then the company would not be able to continue to trade. Shareholders would be last on the list behind creditors and hopefully depositors.

As such if they get anything it should be a very nominal compensation. A bankrupt company is a bankrupt company. There cannot see why shareholders are being bail out.

"Many companies can make huge losses for 2/3 year periods, and then come out the other side as profitable companies."

The difference here is the company cannot continue to trade. This is not about losses but lack of liquidity.


Finally: But why and who are we bailing out in the credit markets. These other companies that hbos owns will probably be going concerns and could be hived off. It is the bank that is the problem. It is dependent on the credit markets to cover its lending and it cannot refinance this debt.

If a bank has 100billion deposits and 200 billion mortage/business lending debt with the difference financed by other financial companies via the global credit markets we are effectively bailing out these unname and probably non uk companies.

I just want to know who they are. As far as i am concerned companies that lent to these banks should lose their money if a bank goes bust. That is capitalism. We only bail them out if there is a good reason. Unless we know who there are and their exact exposure then can we really be sure who we are bailing out. Is it Saudi oil funds invested in the UK. I think we have to assume with so much debt in the uk banking system that it is foreign companies that we are bailing out. Or possibly pension funds. I can understand bailing out pension funds but i want to know what is really going on rather than the superfiscal rubbish we are hearing.
73

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

17/11/2008 17:44:27
#83 "The UK Government should insist that the HBOS business bank is hived off from the corporate body and put up for sale to another bank with no significant presence in Scotland - or indeed a credible management team capable of attracting the required backing from public and private sources."

It takes something like 6 months to organise a merger/takeover. HBOS needs something a lot quicker or it will have to be antionalised or go to the wall. ban of China withdrew not because of the government but because they realised that HBOS was a basket-case - why else would it need a £10 billion loan facility from LTSB?

Even Alex Neil says there is no alternative bidder now. Such talk is just that - talk.

If there is no merger the only solution is nationalisation - that's not me saying I prefer the merger - it's me saying that the choices available for HBOS are very limited. The choices are akin to choosing between cutting your knackers off with or without anaesthetic - an unpalatable choice no matter which way you look at it.
74

Stan Butler,

Cemetery Gates 17/11/2008 18:00:01



Independent HBOS fight 'gaining pace'


No it isn't. More wishful thinking from the Scotsman.

HBOS is history. Live with it.


75

Jock MacSprog,

17/11/2008 18:38:12
aside from these two egomaniac fantasisers saying so and attempting to hype it in the Scottish press, what evidence is there of this non bid "gaining pace" ? None whatsoever.
76

Astonished,

inverclyde 17/11/2008 19:01:02
Stan Butler - You wish !

For shareholders of HBOS :

http://www.independenthbos.com/Vote.html

Fill in the form and send it off - ignore the doomsayers - and remember history tells us that many a mickle...... has toppled a dishonest,sneaky and underhand regime before.

I am indebted to karin for pointing this site out.

On a lighter note -I see there a fair few refugees from the Nuliebour herald - Do you think Alf will get his knighthood and/or his jotters ?
77

Sumlogic,

17/11/2008 19:21:19
64 sm753

YES, until it’s able to stand and eventually pay that portion off, Absolutely for Jobs, for competition and for Scotland’s financial system.


Just why do you call yourself "sumlogic" again?

Depends on whether or not your looking for answers or a cheap jibe, ad hominem.
78

Westfield Bairns,

falkirk 17/11/2008 19:51:28
78 Anifa
Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling may be Scottish however they are an embarrasment to their Country and as for Scottish Labour, er, they appeared to have vanished. They should be fighting for Scottish jobs however which will not have gone unnoticed by the Scottish public
79

steve52,

Kinfauns 17/11/2008 20:03:27
There is no chance of HBOS not being taken over by Lloyds TSB. This has nothing to do with saving the bank but all to do with teaching the Scots a lesson for having the audacity to vote out Labour here in Scotland. At Least Edward the 1st did not try to hide teaching the Scots a lesson.

It really surprises me that the Scotsman is taking the stance it is regarding the take over of HBOS given their obvious support for Labour. One just has to read Mr Maddox today on the Politician of the year awards to see how rose tinted his spectacles are. A thumping victory for Labour in Glenrothes....rubbish, they held onto a seat with the assistance of all Scottish media who printed the lies and misleading statements put out by Labour Now Glasgow east, well there was a thumping victory. He even slags off Mr Salmond or his comments on Iceland yet makes no mention of the fact that the UK treasury ( Labour) advised councils up and down the UK to put their money in Icelandic banks.
80

Hermann,

17/11/2008 20:07:59
The gutter newspaper News of the World reveals disgusting and decadent behaviour from HBOS executives staying at a hotel near Chester. They also ruined a wedding party.

http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/news/73610/HBOS-Sex-and-cocaine-shame.html

Here is an extract:
____________________
“ OUR snouts-in-the-trough bankers are at it again. And this time their depraved antics in a sordid drug- fuelled ORGY are even harder to stomach.

For today we reveal how a swaggering group of HBOS executives had sex with a naked female colleague at a hotel after one of them SNORTED COKE off her BELLY BUTTON.

The loadsamoney louts also WRECKED a wedding weekend— keeping guests awake by hammering on their doors through the early hours.”
_____________________

In my view HBOS needs nationalising and an enforced clean sweep - starting from the top.
81

Missbehave (Princess Fiona),

17/11/2008 20:32:45
I PRAY YOU WILL GET INDEPENDENCE youv had 300 years of tyranny weave had 300 years of blackmail.

unfortunately its not possible you would starve without the likes of me feeding you.

instead of licking your wounds start pulling your weight.
82

Missbehave (Princess Fiona),

17/11/2008 20:33:27
98 reply to 14
83

Missbehave (Princess Fiona),

17/11/2008 20:38:11
95 westfield

labour has cleared the coffers to save Scottish jobs billions of pounds my god what more do you want?

talk about ungratefull
84

Beachcomber,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 21:08:25
From Guy Fox Blog site: http://www.order-order.com/

Gordon Brown Worst PM of All Time for Pension Funds
sent Guido this neat piece of research* :-


Writer - I took UK stock market performance since 1902 assuming reinvested income and adjusting down for cost of living to give real terms equity market growth for each of the last 106 years.

I matched this up to the dates of each of the twenty prime ministers who have run this country since 1902 (interpolating to the right dates as required). This gave me a proxy for how much the equity markets had risen (or not) under their stewardship.

From there, it is a small hop to a comparable figure - compound annual growth rates - and, hey presto, we can compare the financial performance of each of prime ministers, and also of the parties, to see if one party has a better long term track record.

It makes interesting reading.

Prime Minister - Years in Office - avg Ann/Growth Rt.
Harold McMillan 6.8 13.2%
John Major 6.4 12.8%
Churchill 8.7 12.1%
Bonar Law 0.6 12.2%
McDonald 6.8 9.4%
Baldwin 7.2 9.1%
Callaghan 3.1 6.0%
Balfour 3.4 5.6%
Blair 10.2 4.2%
Campbell Bannerman 2.3 3.6%
Wilson 7.8 3.2%
Lloyd George 5.9 2.7%
Attlee 6.2 -0.1%
Asquith 8.7 -3.2%
Douglas-Home 1.0 -4.8%
Eden 1.8 -5.0%
Heath 3.7 -3.8%
Chamberlin 3.0 -11.00%
Brown 1.3 -26.02%

It sure does. It doesn't even take into account his plundering of pension funds during his Chancellorship. He robbed pensioners by taxing pension funds and he robs children by running up the national debt..
85

Rufus T. Firefly,

17/11/2008 22:33:22
88 Alan B,

Alan you make some very goood points there to be fair.

I have tried to find out who the major shareholders are in Hbos but could not find who they were.

They are not listed in the most recent annual report.

I do know however that AllianceBernstein, Legal & General, M&G and Standard Life are major holders.
86

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 17/11/2008 22:34:03
"But Sir Peter, who is campaigning to stop the Lloyds move alongside former Royal Bank of Scotland chief executive Sir George Mathewson, said analysis of figures in a circular put to HBOS shareholders last Friday had strengthened the case for its independence."

News to me. I'm a shareholder and appear to be off the mailing list. Hope I get notification of the right to vote on 12 December - before the 12th December.

Hmmm? Who is organising the postal side of things?
87

Missbehave (Princess Fiona),

17/11/2008 22:53:08
it shows the extent this countries been brought to by the extreme stupidity of Scottish banks.

we've (british) have put so much into the tiny region of Scotland to save it from total collapse and still no gratitude.
88

Rufus T. Firefly,

17/11/2008 22:58:08
105 Bird of Prey.

Yes that is me before I shaved.

By the way you are going to make a headline story in tomorrows Scotsman.

Would you like me to make a comment on it for you now?
89

Rufus T. Firefly,

17/11/2008 22:59:50
Bird of Prey

Spook pointed me to a website with your picture on it

http://www.moonaire.com/images/portfolio/caricature_yazid.jpg
90

Rufus T. Firefly,

17/11/2008 23:18:34
109 Thats a top website.

I feel privileged that you made all the effort.

Bad spelling of 'attittude' though.
91

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 23:23:12

At close of day, the Bank will still be there 'whatever'!

Old Chinese proverb,,

With money you can buy a house, but not a home.

With money you can buy a clock, but not time.

With money you can buy a bed, but not sleep.

With money you can buy a book, but not knowledge.

With money you can buy a doctor, but not good health.

With money you can buy a position, but not respect.

With money you can buy blood, but not life.

With money you can buy sex, but not love.



92

Rufus T. Firefly,

17/11/2008 23:34:49
113 Yes its the best website of its kind that I have ever seen.

Mind you your life story is a hell of a boring.

As for the use of 'Embra', oh dear oh dear.

The world will be delighted to know that you love Jelly though. What a great blog.

You need to get some tips from Spook, now theres a man that writes a good blog.

Your one looks like it was written by a 5 year old compared to his.

I Love Jelly.
I Love Jelly.
I Love Jelly.

Well done, very worthwhile.
93

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 17/11/2008 23:55:46


Bird of Prey ~118,

One better be careful, or one might get 'Bird-Flu'.



94

the.ally ,

max. 18/11/2008 00:13:29
Buckpool loon #89, you make the best point; the HBoS board are the most incompetent in this ridiculous charade with laughing-boy Brown-the-Clown parading as the saviour of the global economy, while, the HBoS board wait for their million+ bonus to drop through the door.

Well, I can tell both Hornby and Stevenson, yer no' getin' it!

allymax.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


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.