Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Lloyds TSB takeover of HBOS wins shareholders' backing

View Video
Download Video

Video

Wendy Dunsmore of union Unite on the Lloyds/HBoS story
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: 20 November 2008
SHAREHOLDERS in Lloyds TSB yesterday voted overwhelmingly to take over competitor HBOS – leaving the Edinburgh bank's ballot the only obstacle to the controversial deal.
Despite the landslide vote at yesterday's extraordinary general meeting, concerns were raised that battered HBOS would drag down Lloyds TSB..

And shareholders directed their frustration about the banking sector collapse and economic decline at chairman, Sir Victor Blank. The Glasgow summit drew two groups of protesters – the Scottish Liberal Democrats, who want HBOS to remain independent, and the Unite union, who want job stability for employees of both banks.

However, the acquisition was backed by 95.98 per cent of shareholders – many of them institutions which may have stakes in both parties to the deal.

It was confirmed by the chairman that the Bank of Scotland brand would be retained, and that the registered office of the merged superbank – Lloyds Banking Group – would be based north of the Border.

Sir Victor was clearly at pains to point out the attractiveness of the deal for Lloyds' shareholders. He stressed that the banks had discussed such a move for many years, but competition law had prevented its completion.

He also continually insisted that Lloyds had taken a prudent approach to risk-management and was stronger than its banking peers as a result. He said the merged bank would take the "Lloyds approach" to business.

Nationalist MSP Alex Neil, who has been campaigning against the acquisition and was involved in an abandoned alternative bid, was disappointed by the vote.

He said: "I fully understand why Lloyds TSB shareholders would vote to acquire HBOS at such a snip, but the very fact they have voted so overwhelmingly in favour exposes the poor deal being offered to HBOS and their shareholders. HBOS has been handed to Lloyds TSB on a plate, despite it needing far less recapitalisation as an independent bank than Lloyds TSB itself."

But Shane O'Riordain, a spokesman for HBOS, said: "We welcome today's overwhelming vote in favour of our recommended merger.

"This is another very important milestone for our deal."

Lloyds TSB has 814,000 shareholders. It is thought about 700,000 are retail shareholders, 318 of whom braved the cold to attend yesterday's summit at the Scottish Exhibition and Conference Centre. A clear majority of more than 50 per cent of those shareholders who voted was required to pass the deal.

They backed seven other special resolutions, including plans to raise £5.5 billion through the issue of new and special preference shares to strengthen Lloyds' balance sheet.

There are concerns that up to 40,000 jobs may go as a result of the merger and the Office of Fair Trading has reported that competition is likely to be reduced in certain areas.

Sir Victor told the meeting: "We do appreciate that many of our employees may feel apprehensive at this time but, in creating what we believe will be the UK's leading financial services company, we believe the combination will generally provide enhanced opportunities for those who work in our group."

The chairman said it was "inevitable" that there would be some "rationalisation", but that employees would be consulted.

Eric Daniels, the chief executive, admitted the outlook ahead was "challenging" for the entire banking sector.

But he said the bank expected its "major branches", including Bank of Scotland, would continue to "play an important part" in the new institution.

Sir Victor added: "I think this is a great deal for both sets of shareholders with the opportunity to share in the upside of creating the UK's leading financial group." However, shareholder Tony Peterson said: "British banks seem to be in a state of absolute chaos at the moment.

"Can you understand that many of us present find it profoundly disturbing that this proposed deal was cooked up at a cocktail party in league with a Prime Minister prepared to set aside national law, competition law, designed for the common good? That most of us, in fact, think this deal stinks?"

Sir Victor dismissed his comments as "just untrue".

He said the deal was one which had been discussed "many years ago".

Sir Victor added: "The opportunity to buy HBOS in our view is a unique opportunity and one that to some extent became possible by circumstances – the lack of confidence in HBOS and the lack of liquidity in HBOS… I'm excited about the possibility of linking the two and I do believe it's the right thing to do."

He was later challenged by shareholder Professor William Gordon, who asked: "If Lloyds and HBOS have been discussing a merger for years, how did they expect to get around the competition laws before Gordon Brown intervened?"

Sir Victor replied: "The competition issue was the main obstacle to getting together earlier."

If the deal gets the go-ahead at the HBOS meeting next month, it will create a banking giant with around 145,000 staff and 3,000 branches across the UK.

Protesters keep up fight against takeover and job cuts

TWO sets of protesters armed with placards assembled outside the Lloyds TSB egm yesterday. Unite members, some of whom had travelled from London, were clad in T-shirts emblazoned "Secure Jobs > Secure Bank".

Wendy Dunsmore, a national officer for the union, said: "We are campaigning for no compulsory redundancies and no offshoring of jobs. We are calling on the company to meet with us as quickly as possible. We want shareholders' support in that."

Also campaigning outside the SECC were the Scottish Liberal Democrats, who have been lobbying to keep HBOS independent. The Scottish leader, Tavish Scott, is part of a cross-party campaign group that includes the independent MSP Margo MacDonald and Alex Neil, an SNP MSP.

Mr Scott told journalists that the party wanted to "maintain competition in the marketplace". He insisted there was still time to win the campaign. "It's not a done deal," he said. "I hope shareholders think very carefully about what they do here in Glasgow and in Birmingham in a few weeks (at the HBOS egm]."

Erikka Askeland - Heated debate and grilling the bosses can't dispel the chill

A CHILL wind blew through the cavernous exhibition hall No3 at the SECC in Glasgow yesterday, and not even the anger of Lloyds TSB shareholders could heat the place up.

Almost 400 turned out for the general meeting, to vote on Lloyds TSB's takeover of HBOS. The outcome was – perhaps surprisingly, considering some of the heated arguments aired against it – strongly in favour. But many were keen to have their say and the board put up with two and a half hours of grilling in the otherwise chilly surroundings, before share-holders were able to use hand-held electronic voting devices to let their views be known.

There were the gripes of shareholders being denied dividends while the government hogs the pay-outs – at least until the bank can pay off the taxpayer-owned £1 billion of preference shares.

Most of the shareholders at the SECC were not "fat cats"; rather pensioners, many reliant on share dividends to supplement their pensions. Clearly, they thought the deal on offer was a real dog.

Many believed Lloyds TSB has performed well – albeit its shares were trading at about 130p on the day, as opposed to £10. (The share price was falling even further while the meeting went on.) They tended to agree with the chairman and chief executive's line that Lloyds is alone among its peers in having been run prudently.

But why, they wondered, should we get tangled in the morass that is HBOS?

HBOS got a drubbing. It was a failed bank, terminally diseased, with an unhealthy dependency on wholesale funding in the region of £200 billion a year, according to the shareholders who got hold of the microphones.

The board shrugged off these barbs. It was made clear Lloyds planned to beat these problems out like dirt out of a rug – a process that would, of course, be helped along by the extra £17 billion that the combined group would raise once the deal was signed. In adversity comes opportunity, said the chairman.

On the stage, the urbane Sir Victor Blank was working hard for his money. He got £661,000 last year. Aside from chairing board meetings, events such as this are where he puts in the hard graft. The chief executive, Eric Daniels, was steely and deep-voiced. Only a few times did Sir Victor's and Daniels' patience with questions wear thin.

Most questions were well mannered, if lengthy.

Shane O'Riordain, the head of communications at HBOS, was watching carefully, and joked that he hoped the HBOS shareholders' vote on the deal in December would go as smoothly. Now that the Lloyds vote has come out so much in favour of the deal, it seems unlikely the HBOS vote will be that much different.

Sir Victor at least had the audience on his side when he pushed for a move to the voting. The shareholders had started to groan aloud when each new inquisitor brandished a speech. Once the vote was done, Sir Victor barely had time to thank them as the audience cleared out to retrieve warm coats.


Page 1 of 1

 
1

Rufus T. Firefly,

19/11/2008 23:08:03
Remember this from November 6th....

"A rival bid for HBOS could emerge within days" says SNP MSP Alex Neil.

SNP MSP Alex Neil said he was "very very confident" at least another bid would be made for the Edinburgh-based bank.

Well Alex, like your namesake it all turned out to be hot air.
2

Rufus T. Firefly,

19/11/2008 23:14:43
Also from November 6th....

Mr Neil also claimed there was an "arrogant presumption" made by senior figures in both Lloyds TSB and HBOS that the deal would go through and added: "They seem to forget that the shareholders have not yet, and I don't believe they will, approve this merger."

Well Mr Neil, wrong again.

A massive 4% of Lloyds TSB shareholders voted AGAINST the merger.

Its guaranteed that the HBOS shareholders will vote it through as well.

If MSPs were on performance related pay, Alex Neil would be due all of us tax payers a refund.
3

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 00:17:18

Rufus ~2,

"Its guaranteed that the HBOS shareholders will vote it through as well"

'Of-Course', they WILL, this 'take-over' was in place,....''done and dusted', Months ago!

I am,..'blue-in-the-face' in telling everybody this!

Will they Listen?

A 'BIG FAT NO'!!


4

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 00:18:10
Must have taken ages to through all the bids that were made.

SNP shown up again as being groundless propoganda merchants.

I see their having some very heavy snow in Norway.
5

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 00:19:08
Charles

When SNP is involved the truth "falls on deaf ears"
6

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 00:22:19


Another Saturday Night ~5,

Are you BTO?

Your postings are similar!

Well-said, about the Snow in Norway, far more interesting, than this, 'for donkey years' Known outcome of our poor wee banks :)


7

Rufus T. Firefly,

20/11/2008 00:23:19
#4 Charles, credit where it is due. You have been saying this would happen for months. Alex Neil should donate his salary to you!
8

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 00:24:28


Never mind! Salmond opened a 'Bridge' Yesterday!

Great Achievement! :))
9

Rufus T. Firefly,

20/11/2008 00:25:28
#5 BTO is it you?

Yes they must have been working from dawn until dusk to go through all these alternative bids.
10

Rufus T. Firefly,

20/11/2008 00:29:49
#11 Charles yes he has been busy. Camped in Glenrothes for 2 weeks, posing with Maradona posters, at the Scotland Game, opening bridges. . .you would never know there was a credit crunch on.
11

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 00:30:08

Rufus ~9,

God I need his "salary" right now!, Absolutely everything is in a state of devastation for me right now!

But Life 'sucks', I have no luck with anything in life!

Bird of Prey ~10,

Just mind you dont get the,...'Bird-Flu'!!


12

,

20/11/2008 00:31:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
13

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 00:31:20
RTF

Yes.

They had to have a special post office van just to deliver the sealed bids.

Sadly most turned out to be "if you open this enevlpoe you are the winner of a million pounds".

Salmond and his boys, out of touch with the real world as ever, carefully opened each one.

"Must be some mistake", said Salmond. "I didn't win anything"

"Oh well, I've got a few more bridges lined up that need a good ribbon cutting", he mumbled to himself as he layered his toast with slimline butter.
14

Conan the Librarian™,

20/11/2008 00:32:06
12
Like you with your next sign-on Rufus?

Except it is, of course, dusk till dawn.
15

Conan the Librarian™,

20/11/2008 00:33:57
16
Asinine, how are you this morning?
16

,

20/11/2008 00:38:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
17

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 00:38:23
The public deserve an apology from Salmond for trying to mislead them regarding "other bidders".

Some, sadly, were taken in by his tall tales.
18

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 00:39:03


"Salmond" even got driven over this "Bridge" at a great rate of knots! (about 2mph)

We must realise this 'Speed' for Him, Does Help Scotland!

Afterall, no-one, will suffer, if he has-a-crash! :))


19

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 00:40:20
#20

I see you are another of the "don't really know what's going on, but I will complain anyway" crowd.

20

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 00:42:17
#22

Charles

It was a "green drive". Cutting down on emissions. Saving polar bears.
21

Shamus,

Glasgow 20/11/2008 00:42:54
When the merger occurs in about three to ten years time between Lloyds TSB/ HBOS and some other bank the SNP WILL BE WHINGING and out off power. They really have to switch on if they are to be a serious party. THEY HAVE TO LOOK AT HISTORY and Learn. Alec is better left to opening Labour Bridges.
22

Conan the Librarian™,

20/11/2008 00:47:29
21
Asinine

So there was no interest at all? The Hyaenidae that are the banking "fraternity" weren't sniffing about to see if HBOS was on it's back legs?

22
Charles, Charles.I hope you were wearing a hat today; there was cold wind.
23

,

20/11/2008 00:47:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
24

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 00:48:19


Another Saturday Night ~24,

I think 'one' would be better saving our "Banks o Scottish"

The "Bears" will survive, quite nicely with the People that 'Care'

I wish I was a,....."Polar Bear"! :)


I would have a,..."Fish Account" ready protected, by the 'Scottish People' that 'Care'.


25

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 00:51:32
Charles

"Fresh air" . Salmond could use some.

Bonnie Banks of Scotland.

Get out an about. He could listen to people and "learn a few things"

Fish on Friday..

The list is endless....
26

the.ally ,

max. 20/11/2008 00:52:43
Why are they replaying yesterday's news?

New Labour have no shame like the spin-game.

Nah, this game's no' over 'til the man-in-black bla's the whistle. Seems tae me the 'oorey-'enry's in westminster want to force the hand of the HBoS shreholders by the english crown treick of decipt, deception, deflection. and well, their usual lies, lies, and more damned lies.

Laughing-boy Brown-the-Clown and his New Labour 'bottom-feeders' have no shame.

I find it disgusting to have politicians like the New Labour government say they represent me.

HBoS shareholders, don't give in to englsih crown lies, trickery, and deceipt.

For the financial-institution shareholders of HBoS; we'll find uou where-ever you hide. Hornby and Stevenson can't hide, and neither can you. Don't do the dirty on Scotland.
allymax.
27

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 00:55:59
#33

Has your model railway set broken down?

Is it trouble with the signals
28

Conan the Librarian™,

20/11/2008 00:56:16
31
Richard1

Fiendish people the Japanese, hate Italians don'tcha know.

WITHOUT THE ROMANS, THE WORLD WE SEE TODAY MAY NEVER HAVE HAPPENED.
29

Conan the Librarian™,

20/11/2008 00:59:51
34
Ah, clever, Hornby, Stevenson and train sets.

You'll be talking rocket science next.
30

,

20/11/2008 01:00:05
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
31

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 01:02:07

This 'Mad' early morning thread, is quite 'Apt' for the topic matter,.....

'Water-under-the-Bridge' As Salmond must think HBOS :)

'Fish, Polar Bears, and snow in Norway'

The Banks in Norway are doing very well,..'Thanyou very much'

As Are the 'Bears and Fish!

As the Scottish 'Fishermen' have laid down a new proposed laws, which will be accepted!!, to stop Soo many dead fish, being flung back in the sea!

Are these 'Fish' share-holders?


32

Conan the Librarian™,

20/11/2008 01:03:01
36
My beloved ROI?

Is that cockney?

33

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 01:04:51

ASN ~34,

Hilarious!! :))))) :DD!

Don't forget the,...'Toy Soldiers'! :)


34

the.ally ,

max. 20/11/2008 01:05:47
Now, let me see; what could I do with the moniker 'Another Saturday Night'.

Let's try this, As-An-Ni.ne
Yep, that seems to fit.

Are you currently posting as 'S & M sevenwivesme' also?
35

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 01:05:50
Salmond is taking up skiing.

All part of his research into the Norwegian model.

It has been suggested that he may look into geyser jumping as well.

Is there no end to the variety of things the man will get up to....
36

,

20/11/2008 01:16:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
37

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 01:18:17

ASN ~44,

I am sure he IS!,...'A very Nice Man' at heart, I watched him closely on the News, for the Opening, of the,....

...'Very Nice Bridge', that 'Others Made'!

Just the wrong Job, he may be in!

As you Know, my DYW works with Children, we Know Plenty on this subject!

It occurred to me, while,...'Watching His Face'

Our 'Boy Salmond' Would make a 'Great Nursery Nurse''

"Gah, Gah, Goo, Goo," I need fed, and my nappy changed"

"Certainly my little Sweet", says our leader!

38

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 01:18:21
Salmond's suits are not cheap.

No one could possibly charge for them.
39

the.ally ,

max. 20/11/2008 01:18:56
So, Charles Skinskaill like funny stuff; well here's something just for you Charles.

Charles Skinskaill is a hard-of-hearing geriatric . He's goes to the doctors with his home-help for a check-up.
The doc' says, "Charles, I need a wa'nk sample, a urine sample and a stoole sample".
Charles turns to his home-help and says, 'What did he say?'
His home help says, 'He needs a pair of your underwear'.

Laugh now laughing-boy.
allymax.
40

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 01:21:41
Charles

There will be no shortage of "work" for Uncle Alex at Christmas time.

Nursing homes to visit, ginger wine to consume, chestnuts and a few "speeches"

That should do for starters.

Busy man after all, "only so many hours in the day"
41

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 01:23:26
A wee blue car for allymax!
42

Conan the Librarian™,

20/11/2008 01:27:32
49
Asinine

You ARE Jack...er McWhatshisname and I claim my prize.
43

SkeptikScot,

20/11/2008 01:31:09
I've said on this board that I thought if anyone stopped the merger it would be the Lloyds TSB shareholders, not wanting to be strapped to an ailing HBOS ... and I thought it could be close. Oops, sorry -I was wrong!
44

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 01:31:55
"52

Your posts are unclear.

Lack "definition"
45

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 01:32:16


the.ally ~48,,

Listen! your comment does not bother me, if others wish its removal, it will show, being nasty, is not needed!

If not, that's life! as some may want it to-be.

'Sticks-and-Stones', and 'Water-under-the Bridge'!

46

,

20/11/2008 01:35:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
47

Conan the Librarian™,

20/11/2008 01:39:42
54
Your definition "lacks understanding".

Damnant quodnon intelligunt.
48

Conan the Librarian™,

20/11/2008 01:50:29
56 re 59

Is this is a double act?
49

Vaward,

20/11/2008 02:49:11
Actually, the first concentration camps were opened by the Spanish in Cuba. You also make an argument that the Americans got there first with their Indian reservations.

Furthermore, not sure that the Saxe-goth tribe ever ruled anything. Pretty sure that ever since the 'Glorious Revolution' Parliament has been calling all the shots. Much like this takeover, eh? Parliaments doing ; ).

Speaking of Parliament. Liberty is a great British invention. 1688 Bill of Rights and the British Enlightenment, all that stuff. I've read my Hutcheson, Hume, Smith, Hobbes and Locke. 100 years ahead of the French anyways. Going even further back there was Habeas Corpus, Magna Carta, they're good ones. Industrial Revolution, etc,.

Maybe the Japanese have a point!



50

Navvy,

20/11/2008 03:09:05
one wonders why the EOGM was not held in Edinburgh

to scared to show their faces there?
51

Angleland Isover,

20/11/2008 06:48:06
Voting yes would be inadmissible in court because they had a gun at their head.
52

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 07:22:53
#63

Have you been watching your Perry Mason box set again?
53

Rufus T. Firefly,

20/11/2008 07:29:31
Vaward did you ever watch Tenko?
54

Rufus T. Firefly,

20/11/2008 07:38:50
I wonder if it has sunk in With Alex Neil yet that he does not own HBOS.

He clearly does not understand how and why shareholders vote.

They should move him onto the Mary Queen Of Scots Bones Repatriation Campaign.

He should be able to do less damage there.

55

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 07:49:37
Salmond is set to be the host on a new series of The Generation Game.

Surely he won't make a mess of that as well.
56

Dave,

Western Isles 20/11/2008 08:14:04
So it's a take over, not a merger?

I see.
57

Rufus T. Firefly,

20/11/2008 08:21:44
Alex Salmond's presentation to the Lloyds Tsb board must have gone down a treat. Remind me again what did he achieve?

Oh Yes, I remember, nothing.

What did the extremely confident Alex Neil's pointless blustering achieve?

Oh Yes, I remember, nothing.

Alex and Alex, or "Dick und Doof" as they are known in Germany.
58

Dave,

Western Isles 20/11/2008 08:23:23
So, it's a take over, not a merger of a once Scottish owned and based insitution but the capital to do so is coming from London Labour.

I see.

So it will be a government owned bank.

Right.

Not sure if I feel to happy about that. I'm getting a vote soon in for the RBS to either accept or not accept the government hand out (they haven't accepted it yet).

I think I know which way I'm going to vote.
59

Tynietiger,

20/11/2008 08:25:57
RTF # 1 & 2

Talking of hot air, did you hear that buffoon Lord Foulkes of Bluster on BBC Radio Scotland Scotland at Ten Programme last night.

Discussing HBOS (and the government's obstruction of rival bids) he continually interrupted Alex Neil and objected to what he called "leading questions" being asked by the presenter Derek Bateman who eventually gave up and faded him out and moved on to another topic.
60

TWC,

20/11/2008 08:33:43
70 Rufus T. Firefly,
How are things in Lothian they are rising against the poodles over there
61

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 08:39:01
Salmond reminds me of Eddie Waring.

Except Salmond doesn't try to be funny
62

TWC,

20/11/2008 08:42:34
Rufus,you are a socialist of a kind do you realise that big Brown is going to give our money tio banks which took our jobs and put them Off Shore where they are today, is there a plan to bring those jobs back now and give them back to the share holders?

Unite said they supported the HBoS takeover but wanted no redundancies these two things are mutually exclusive, they let their members down and it is a disgrace.
63

TWC,

20/11/2008 08:45:17
74 Another Saturday Night - poodle
64

Another Saturday Night,

20/11/2008 08:52:46
TWC

What do your initials stand for.

65

Dave,

Western Isles 20/11/2008 08:55:18
sm753

Not paying attention? I said "once". You do understand what the word means? And by once, I mean that these banks have become Global entities so it matters not location or ownership.

So it won't be a government owned bank? No capital from Westminster? Really?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7738820.stm

The shareholders of the RBS (myself included) have not yet cast our vote to whether accept the government hand out or not.

Go do some research before opening that flap in the front of your head.
66

TWC,

20/11/2008 09:01:54
#78, why do you want to know, who said they are initials
67

TWC,

20/11/2008 09:02:43
Rufus,Answer please

you are a socialist of a kind do you realise that big Brown is going to give our money tio banks which took our jobs and put them Off Shore where they are today, is there a plan to bring those jobs back now and give them back to the share holders?

Unite said they supported the HBoS takeover but wanted no redundancies these two things are mutually exclusive, they let their members down and it is a disgrace.
68

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

20/11/2008 09:10:04
"This is not a good situation but to pretend there was some magic "independent" solution is simply fantasy or even deception."

Agreed. Some here portray this as a choice between good and evil - it isn't - it's a choice between one evil and a lesser evil.

The merger is going to go ahead - the important thing is to make sure that the Lloyds Banking Group makes it as painless as possible, with as few job losses as possible.
69

John south of Soutra,

20/11/2008 09:10:28
I see that the 3 usual suspects are on for their early morning love-in
70

Dave,

Western Isles 20/11/2008 09:12:08
82

Lets be clear, it's NOT a merger. It's a government backed take over and an aggressive government backed take over since Darling changed the rules with regards accepting other bids.
71

Dave,

Western Isles 20/11/2008 09:24:19
sm753

Poor attempt at a rebutal. Never mind.
72

Dave,

Western Isles 20/11/2008 09:26:09
"As you can see I have done the research on this many times" sm753


hahahahahaha! Judging by your comment @77, that is plainly NOT TRUE!

Stop blagging, you have failed. Be gracious in defeat.
73

Alan B,

20/11/2008 09:28:14
Not sure why Lloyds shareholders have gone so over whelmingly for this deal. It does not really seem a good deal for lloyds.

74

Alan B,

20/11/2008 09:32:28
We should not lose sight of the fact that no matter what happens now with regard to HBOS the mess within the banking sector with banks failing is largely been caused by mismanagement from Brown.

Unfortunately he has been unwilling to accept his share of the responsibility from the whole sector failing and the economy going into meltdown. Once upon a time ministerial responsibility meant something.
75

Edward,

20/11/2008 09:42:35
Hopefully the HBOS shareholders will show some backbone and reject the take over
I find it digusting that Alistair Darling is trying to influence decisions by stating the money will be reduced if the merger does not go ahead. Thats actually blackmail, pure and simple and in my book thats a criminal offence!
The Labour Government are doing there best to undermine the Scottish banking sector. They have used back breifing through the media to undermine both RBS and HBOS (Peston has been exposed on this), they even went out there way to block and discourage any other bank from outside the UK of having any interest in bidding for HBOS (again using Peston to 'leak' out Bank of China details within minutes of meetings and discussions at the treasury). Now Darling is bing blatent with his blackmail.
What I find also disgusting is there are so called Scot's on these forumes that are more than happy to see Scottish banking institutions go down and in the case of HBOS, the more than likely situation of 20,000 to 40,000 job losses as a result of the carpetbagging by LloydsTSB!
76

Edward,

20/11/2008 09:48:10
#89 Alan B
Fully agree, the whole economic problem in the UK, lies with Brown and his misshandling of the economy
All his posturing, trying to make out he will save the world will not work! The fact of the matter is the world IS facing an economic downturn, BUT the UK is just not prepared for it, thanks to Brown. now he wants to borrow money to solve the problem, the problem is this has to be paid back. Unfortunaely the UK's gold reserves are seriously depleted, thanks to Brown flogging off a large chunk at nock down prices when he was chancellor.
Brown can bluster and posture all he likes, the problem with the uk economy is completely down to him!
77

Grahamski,

Falkirk 20/11/2008 09:54:54
Good to see the cybernats have moved from their bellowing bluster to pedantic sophistry. The SNP's behaviour throughout this crisis has been nothing short of despicable. Mr Salmond has been shown to be a spiteful political opportunist whose priority seems to be making cheap shots and scoring politically rather than actually helping. He was quick to shoot his mouth off about English spivs but wasn't quite so keen to talk about his friends in charge of Scotland's banking when they were shown to be guilty of serious and systemic failures.
Alex Neil's Widow Twanky buffoonery has been useful only in highlighting the paucity in serious economic brains within the SNP. Mr Salmond was quite happy to allow Mr Neil to shriek his ill-informed and petty ignorance as long as he attacked Labour with innuendo and downright lies. Mr Neil has been the one shown to be the hysterical liar, where are all his alternative bids he so arrogantly (and wrongly) declared existed? Thankfully his blundering and meddling was ignored by the serious players and his shenanigans haven't resulted in any serious damage.
However, Scotland does deserve better.
78

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

20/11/2008 10:00:38
#89 It's easy to sit and blame Brown for this. Don't get me wrong - I don't think he's blameless either - it's just that I believe their are a number of culprits regards who is responsible.

It wasn't Brown who instigated the whole Credit bubble but Thatcher. It was the Financial Services Act 1986 that led to the creation of the large financial conglomerates and a greater "flexibility" in regulation. This was further loosened in 1990 and compounded by Brown's new FSA in 2000.

That being said, it's not just here that this has happened - it has been a worldwide phenomenon - regulation in general has been a lot looser around the world in the last two decades than in the previous two centuries.

The responsibility lies with politicians (of all colour), the financial sector and, ultimately, us as individuals.

It seems that there are some people who, quite bluntly, are incapable of managing their own finances. Restricting access to credit is a blunt way of protecting individuals from themselves. That may be fine in the short term but it would be better to build up more personal responsibility and find a much more long-term solution to personal financial management.
79

G,

dndy 20/11/2008 10:07:35
I suppose the SNPites will be castigating any Scottish shareholders who voted for the merger as "traitors" or "anti-Scots".....
80

,

20/11/2008 10:17:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
81

Satire above all,

20/11/2008 10:24:30
Any Scot who supports the rape that is taking place in his own land should hang their heads in shame. They won't of course. Why? Because thay have swallowed the Unionist lie that Unionism has been good for Scotland when it clearly HAS NOT.

82

Alan B,

20/11/2008 10:26:37
#The Federalist

I believe Brown is ultimately responsible. He was clearly in charge of managing the uk economy over a prolonged period. As such he must take responsibility. He even inherited a decent economy so cannot blame his predecessors.

I do not think it is credible to seriously blame individuals. We have to work within the economic system created. Individuals are responsible for their own finances but we cannot credibly blame them for not controlling house price inflation. We cannot blame them from not ensuring decent levels of capital requirements are enforced within the banking sector. We cannot blame uk individuals for failures of the credit markets caused by the US.

Also blaming thatcher is not credible. Someone deregulating something over 20yrs ago is not responsible for poor management 20yrs later. I do not think thatcher was particularly economically competent. My assessment of her time was reasonable ideas in many areas but bad implementation.

Thatcher always preached and believed in personal responsibility and balanced budgets. For all her failures she would not have run up big public sector deficits when economic times were good. While she has a few chancellors for part of that time they adhered to monetarism. That meant they targeted the growth of the money supply and hence credit.

The fact that thatcher wanted to encourage home ownership does not mean that somehow means she can be blamed for Browns massive house price inflation and massive consumer debt levels that has caused.

The fact is brown talked a good game when he was being elected in 97. Prudence, stability, control of house prices, (labour had made an issue of savings ratios in opposition), golden rule on public finance.

In power he simply :
1)broke and fudged his own golden rule not to borrow over the economic cycle after being good for the first few yrs.
2)failed to control house price inflation like he said. And after the negative equity of the early 90s it was
83

Alan B,

20/11/2008 10:27:05
... not like there was not political support for avoiding that situation again.

It is this failure that lead to massive personal debt and this failure that meant banks could not finance all this mortgage debt out of deposits and hence used the credit markets to such a high degree.

It was Brown that changed the inflation target to cpi from the measure of rpi used under the tories to control inflation which meant housing costs were removed. As such while i am supportive of restricting credit via quantitive measures the tories were supportive of using the cost of credit. Brown did neither. Note the european central bank uses money supply growth targets ie the growth of credit.

As such i fail to see how we can reach any other conclusion other than Brown has ultimately failed in managing the uk economy and has left the economy in a worse state than when he found it by weakening so many of our economic fundamentals.
84

Satire above all,

20/11/2008 10:33:19
WE are watching Unionist politics being played out here by the biggest Unionist (anti Scot) of them all. He said "I will do everything in my power to preserve the Union"...even to the extent of putting 20,000 Scots out of a job.

I wonder what argument they wil use to defend the presence of nuclear weapons in Scotland now? They used to state that the loss of jobs to Scotland would be too high a price to pay for the removal of the nuclear submarine base (8,000 job losses, I believe they quoted), but have been happily conspring to create the loss of thousands more than that number. Hypocrasy, or what?

85

Alan B,

20/11/2008 10:38:24
#The Federalist

"It wasn't Brown who instigated the whole Credit bubble but Thatcher. It was the Financial Services Act 1986 that led to the creation of the large financial conglomerates and a greater "flexibility" in regulation."

I do not think that is really true.

Thatcher believed in financial deregulation and light touch regulation but also believe in using interest rates to control the growth of credit.

Brown supported financial deregulation and light touch regulation but did not do anything to control the growth of credit.


My own view is to be relatively ok with financial deregulation (building societies becoming banks and giving them more financial freedom eg credit markets) and light touch regulation but that does not mean

1)not control house price inflation and not controlling the growth of credit. As i have said before i would not solely use the cost of credit as it has implication for the currency and would therefore use ratios to salary for mortgage lending to ensure long term stability. And ensuring adaquate capital requirement to ensure banks were not too exposed to the credit markets.

At the end of the day there are 3 ways:
a)control the amount mortgage holders can borrow
b)control how much banks can borrow to finance that lending
c)control the cost of credit to limit borrowing

2) no regulation or poor regulation. ie nothern rock holding 50 billion worth of mortage in an off shore childrens charity to avoid capital requirements, fsa regulations and tax.
86

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 20/11/2008 10:56:42
Is anyone surprised that the shareholders voted for this ? They are not altruists. What is astonishing, and what will be the enduring story to emerge from this, is why the Government forced this through against the advice of the OFT and in breach of EU rules. Both the Financial Times and the Economist questioned the probity of this takeover, as well as the economic wisdom, and these journals can hardly be described as Scottish or Nationalist.

There will be a lot of heat and light generated by this story in the next few days, but the real evaluation will be in the months and years to follow, and it will not be kind to the architects of this, it won't be kind at all.
87

TWC,

20/11/2008 11:00:31
97 G,dndy I think the only people getting castigated are the Banks and New Labour who between them caused the problems but now want our money to bail them out. But it's a one way street we give them money they continue to have off shore workers doing our jobs and Labour keep a hands off position.
BTW we are not all Nats, who blame Labour.
88

Grahamski,

Falkirk 20/11/2008 11:14:53
104
'Is anyone surprised that the shareholders voted for this ?'
Alex Neil MSP, presumably.
89

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 20/11/2008 11:16:50
107 childish, you ignore the substantive point of my post.
90

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 20/11/2008 11:17:24
ha ha 106 even ! Is childish.
91

The Former Mr. Angry,

Perth 20/11/2008 11:19:14
Let's not forget that much of the demise of HBoS was home-grown. Mainly the Halifax side of things taking on unacceptable securities. BoS ceased to exist at the last merger when it became not a strictly Scottish bank but a UK one.

The main impact of this merger whether necessary or not is the potential for thousands of Scottish jobs to be lost as a direct result of Brown stitching up a deal with Lloyds TSB (what's his retirement plan?) which he did not permit any slack on. If his idea is that Scotland should be punished for daring to vote SNP in larger numbers surely this will come unstuck as the dole queue lengthens, if it does. If we subscribe to the conspiracy theory he has just shot himself in the foot. Mind you the bank has hardly done itself any favours either by employing Hornby and the go-for-it big bonus culture. Employees - you know who to thank.
92

TWC,

20/11/2008 11:28:01
The on line Poll for saving HBoS is 89% pro saving the HBoS so I suppose the people want to save it. I suppose it depends how strongly they feel about it
93

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

20/11/2008 11:34:33
#109 "Let's not forget that much of the demise of HBoS was home-grown. Mainly the Halifax side of things taking on unacceptable securities. BoS ceased to exist at the last merger when it became not a strictly Scottish bank but a UK one."

One of the myths about HBOS is that it was the Halifax side that caused the problems not the Bank of Scotland side.

Unfortunately HBOS's latest trading statement somewhat blows that theory to pieces. It said that HBOS faced write-downs of £5.2bn for the first 9 months of this year including £1.7bn from their corporate banking division. The corporate banking division was a Bank of Scotland not a Halifax speciality.

It is therefore clear that the whole HBOS group - not just the Halifax mortgage side is in a shocking state.
94

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

20/11/2008 11:40:02
#110 Ignoring the fact that most online polls are a joke what does it mean by "saving HBOS"?

It is a totally meaningless term. I would interpret merging with LTSB as saving HBOS ie any move that avoids HBOS folding is saving HBOS. I'm just surprised it is not higher than 89%.

95

TWC,

20/11/2008 11:45:25
109 The Former Mr. Angry,
It will only be a problem for Brown if the people are aware of it; remember Glenrothes.
Already the Big London Labour and it's administration will be co-ordinating atttacks on every weakness or apparent weakness of their major opponent.
They will use the press to achieve this e.g. the current study into C. Diff a very emotional report was done concentrating on Dec 07 till today(SNP Time)
However the training, Facilities and manpower which under-pinned the situation was in place some time so no specific party is responsible for this endemic.
The report says that bad recording means they have missed a lot of C. Diff cases, therefore we will never know; was it even worse before that?
I make this point because of the spin in the programme and this should not be political.
Neither do I blame the previous administration for this because it needed hindsight which is an exact science -- just watch anybody who tries to abuse this situation rather than help fix it.
96

TWC,

20/11/2008 11:48:04
112 The Federalist - you are being obtuse - saving it as an independent bank
97

Foresight,

By the Water of Leith 20/11/2008 11:56:50

Sir Victor told the meeting ".................in creating what we believe will be the the UK's leading financial sewrvices company ...etc"

Herein in lies the present day problem........banks no longer act like banks but are obsessd with providing the widest range possible of financial services. This is exactly why the country is suffering as it is at present. It is shameful that the Chairman of what will become UK's biggest bank is so ignorant of the facts and reality of banking life.
98

,

20/11/2008 12:12:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
99

,

20/11/2008 12:16:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
100

TWC,

20/11/2008 13:15:52
118 sm753,20/11/2008 12:56:30

This situation will be well past before Trident goes, its Tridents replacement we are preventing.
101

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

20/11/2008 13:27:09
#119 To clear something up here there is no replacement system being built. The Trident missile system is being moved to a newer platform. The weapon systems remains unaltered but the submarine that houses it is being replaced.

Moreover a non-nuclear deterrent would still require some sort of submarine-based launch platform - the idea that there are massive savings to be made by scrapping Trident is something of a red herring. The UK submarine fleet is coming to the end of its shelf-life and like Polaris before it needs replaced. It doesn't take a genius to realise that a UK navy that was not protected by a submarine fleet would be a sitting duck in any conventional war.

That's not to say that the proposed replacement is the correct option - I do believe that the MoD have had something of a tunnel-visioned view of the replacement - not all options have been explored.

Whilst being a multilateralist and supporting the retainment of Trident missiles I have severe doubts about the proposed replacement for Vanguard. For example, there has been no real attempt to investigate the possibility of extending the shelf-life of Vanguard from the predicted 25 years to an extended 40 years through an extensive update of the combat systems of the boats.

The biggest driving force behind the the proposed replacement has not been political reasons but economic and industrial - the likes of Amicus have been pressing hard as it would give much needed work to UK dockyards and the skilled engineering sector.
102

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 20/11/2008 13:32:55
119 Why don't you just say we are preventing WMD being sited in Scotland in line with majority votes taken by Scottish MP's and MSP's, and are unlikely to change our minds due to scaremongering and nit picking.
103

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 20/11/2008 13:37:16
It's a bizarre argument for keeping WMD on scottish soil against the wishes of the democratic majority, that some jobs may be at risk. People can be redeployed. but in any case, there is a moral argument for removing trident, there was no moral argument to push through the merger with Lloyds.
104

TWC,

20/11/2008 13:37:18
Ok we will prevent the Boats being updated. Jings all barrack room lawyers today eh?

Any of you guys shop steward or ex shop stewards.
105

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 20/11/2008 13:56:07
Rufus writes:-
“Alex Salmond's presentation to the Lloyds Tsb board must have gone down a treat. Remind me again what did he achieve?”

“It was confirmed by the chairman that the Bank of Scotland brand would be retained, and that the registered office of the merged superbank – Lloyds Banking Group – would be based north of the Border.”

Remind us Rufus, who was it that argued for this to happen?
Was it Gordon Brown, Grace Darling, or was it Alex Salmond?
106

TWC,

20/11/2008 14:02:54
Rufus, good name for a poodle

you are a socialist of a kind do you realise that big Brown is going to give our money tio banks which took our jobs and put them Off Shore where they are today, is there a plan to bring those jobs back now and give them back to the share holders?

Unite said they supported the HBoS takeover but wanted no redundancies these two things are mutually exclusive, they let their members down and it is a disgrace.
107

Alan B,

20/11/2008 14:29:02
#The Federalist

"One of the myths about HBOS is that it was the Halifax side that caused the problems not the Bank of Scotland side.

Unfortunately HBOS's latest trading statement somewhat blows that theory to pieces. It said that HBOS faced write-downs of £5.2bn for the first 9 months of this year including £1.7bn from their corporate banking division. The corporate banking division was a Bank of Scotland not a Halifax speciality."

Couple of points.

One the right downs of debt is not the fundamental problem with hbos. My understanding is the problem was not being able to refinance its lending on the credit markets. It business model based too much on lending (not matter for mortgages or commercial) from the credit markets rather than depositors.

Debt right down is a different issue. ie how many people are likely to default with its mortgage lending and to business. As it is so early in the economic downturn i think it is difficult to say the right downs are no more than accounting measures to update is balance sheet. For instance unless there is negative equity then the bank will probably get all its mortgage debt back by repossessing. The same sort of logic should apply to secured loans to business.

As such i think we have to separate out the issue of why hbos has effectively been unable to keep trading without government intervention ie the failure of the credit markets and accountancy right downs of assets ie its lending due to the oncoming recession.

I am not clear if hbos engaged in silly lending practices like B&B are said to have done with self certs etc or whehter it was just a consequence of a high growth and too high a risk business model where it was too relient on the credit markets to grow and sustain its business. For instance did BOS lend to business that it should not have from the point of view of the quality of the business.

The point about BOS vs Halifax and who is to blame has a few issues:
1)it was the growth of lendin
108

Alan B,

20/11/2008 14:29:30
...lending after the merger/takeover that caused the problem. BOS commercial lending grew rapidly after the merger. That was the reason for the merger. It was also the halifax mgt the ran the business after the merger.

Although that is history and abit irrelevent it get mentioned when unionist talk of bailing out a scottish bank. As it is the combined group with the halifax mgt after the merger that caused the problems.

It is also relevent when unionist say that hbos could not be rescued by an independent government. As it ommits that much of the debt is on the halifax side of the business.

In truth if we were independent and then the merger took place it is very likely both banks would have been operated as more clearly defined separate businesses. As such a scottish government bailout would only be necessary for BOS. While an english government would have been responsible for bailing out halifax or letting it go bust. (off course Brown as the scottish prime minister in an independent scotland would have been invoking anti terror laws against england if the bank went bust lol).

109

Rufus T. Firefly,

20/11/2008 14:35:04
Thats oil below $50 a barrel.

Lowest price for 3 and a half years.

Looks like the SNP will have to re-do their sums.

That aligned to the fact that the 2 biggest banks are almost bankrupt, it looks like independence is a busted flush.
110

Rufus T. Firefly,

20/11/2008 14:38:06
"126 TWC,20/11/2008 14:02:54
Rufus, good name for a poodle

you are a socialist of a kind do you realise that big Brown is going to give our money tio banks which took our jobs and put them Off Shore where they are today, is there a plan to bring those jobs back now and give them back to the share holders?"

Bring back jobs from off shore and give them back to the shareholders??

What on earth are you talking about?

111

Alan B,

20/11/2008 14:49:23
#132 sm753

As none of know what would happen and how thing would be run in an independent scotland it is grossly stupid to say that my hypothesis is wrong. But i have to say that you are getting more and more irritable with any comments you make and as such more irrational.


Different companies operating in different countries quite often have companies set up and registered in the country they are operating in with the different rules and reguations, tax etc.

As such it is not unlikely that holding companies would own the shares of other register companies and hence banks. As such a holding company operating and owning a bank in scotland and another operating in england could then be bailed out separately by the 2 governments in the event of that failure. For instance the 2 banks could be nationalised separately.

Part of the issue with looking at different solutions for halifax and BOS at the moment is the fact they have become pretty integrated since the merger.

I am postulating what could happen if a hypothetic situtation had occurred. As such grow up and stop being so childish.
112

TWC,

20/11/2008 14:58:10
Rufus your in ability to see anything wrong in what Labour propose, you always side with them when another Unionist arguement is going or against SNP in anything they are for. hence the poodle reference.
My point is that We should not finance the Banks blindly without some involvement to prevent Loss of Jobs or to bring back any off shore jobs which were previously taken away.
The US won't take a hands off approach if their money is involved.
113

Alan B,

20/11/2008 15:00:05
#132 sm753

Further more.

Consider the example.

2 limited companies. Limited companies if you are not aware are limited liability companies. As such if these 2 registered companies is held be a holding company. A limited company is a legal entity.

As such if company A bankrupts then company B is not effected as they are 2 different legal entities.

This is a very simplistic example but it shows how business are structured in many cases. It is therefore likely that different banks operating in different countries and legal and tax juristriction would while owned by the same holding companies be constructed in this way.

A more complicated example of what i am talking about is shown by the structure of Nothern Rock that i have mentioned afew times.
114

Alan B,

20/11/2008 15:05:02
#sm753

Note the bit about separate legal entities.

"Who owns Granite?
Although the Rock has a legal responsibility to provide Granite with regular infusions of mortgages, it does not own or run the vehicle. They are separate legal entities. In theory the vehicle is owned by a charitible trust that was set up to raise money for a Down’s syndrome charity in the North East.

Why is it causing such concern?
There are fears that Northern Rock has moved its least-risky mortgages to Granite, leaving the most risky lending on its own balance sheet. Because Granite is a separate company, if the Rock defaulted on its estimated £25 billion government loan, the Government would not be able to access Granite’s mortgages to sell to pay off the debt. If no new mortgages are put into Granite, the bondholders will have to be repaid. "

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3406368.ece
115

Bele's bane,

Scotland 20/11/2008 15:17:27
Free Scotland from English tyranny then Nationalise the Banks!
116

TWC,

20/11/2008 15:23:01
Stock market is taking a dive, hope you're not having toe surrender any shares guys
117

Boab1,

20/11/2008 15:29:45
So, now we know, this deal was discussed 'many years ago'. BY whom? Why is no one talking about the amount of money Lloyds has had to borrow to save itself, which, for it's size, is a far higher percentage than that required by HBoS to survive? Why is this deal necessary since the government guaranteed no bank would go under? Surely more sensible to abandon this merger and make sure the customers' interests are looked after. I really am surprised that someone with a bit of money (maybe even one of the other banks) hasn't launched a legal challenge to prevent this merger.

I think his deal absolutely stinks to the extent that I'll be closing all my accounts with the BoS as soon as I can. I'm sure it'll make very little difference to them unless a large number of people started to do the same but at least I'll know that I'm doing nothing to support this illegal, anti-competitive bank. Once the good deals available on the High Street start to dry up after the creation of this bank then we'll see the real damage done to consumers. I'll have no part in it.
118

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

20/11/2008 15:32:54
#129 "In truth if we were independent and then the merger took place it is very likely both banks would have been operated as more clearly defined separate businesses. As such a scottish government bailout would only be necessary for BOS."

I think that is wishful thinking on your part - HBOS would have operated as a foreign bank with Scottish-based branches - much like Irish banks such as AIB operate in Northern Ireland.

As for the second sentence - you are forgetting that an independent Scottish government would also have had to bail out RBS as well. RBS plans to take £5 billion from the Government as part of its part nationalisation scheme and wants another £15bn from its shareholders in a share issue that is underwritten by the Government. That is potentially £20 billion a Scottish governemnt would have to find before any monies were allocated to BOS. Could they have financed both bailouts? I seriously doubt it.

As you yourself have stated (http://news.scotsman.com/world/UK-taxpayers-get-burned-for.4578882.jp?CommentPage=1&CommentPageLength=1000#3323993):

#125 Alan B,10/10/2008 16:10:23

"Where larger countries have an advantage is the uk will always be able to finance a bail out of say RBS more than scotland will."
119

Boab1,

20/11/2008 15:38:13
#141. But then they would only have had two banks to bail out. They would not have had to bail out B&B, Northern Rock or Lloyds (yes everyone's forgetting about them) like the UK government has had to do, so that's about £100 billion less they'd have had to find. And of course, what everyone's forgetting is that this money is not money the UK govt. had lying around. They've had to go begging to China and the Middle East for this money. No reason why an independent Scotland couldn't do the same, asking for a much smaller amount.
120

,

20/11/2008 15:58:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
121

Alan B,

20/11/2008 15:59:00
#The Federalist

I agree with the second part of your comment. I was just commenting on why i think people talk about BOS and its liabilities compared to Halifax. As i said it is abit irrelevent as it is history now.

In a similar way i would have hoped in an independent scotland the takeover of BOS would not have happen and been protected (and the same for scottish power), however we will never know and that could be wishful thinking on my part :).


"I think that is wishful thinking on your part - HBOS would have operated as a foreign bank with Scottish-based branches - much like Irish banks such as AIB operate in Northern Ireland."

We do not really know as it is hypothetical. I just think that is is likely that as per my #136 that the banks would/could have been run as 2 legal entities under the same holding company. Just googling to find out about granite and Nothern Rock shows the web these banks create to hide and disperse assets.

As such they would probably have not been so integrated. BOS would have probably remained the brand in scotland and Halifax in England. With independence there is more scope for different tax and regulatory regimes as such that also promotes the idea that they would have operated at a more arms length approach. As such any rescue could have more scope to split the 2 companies.

But it is all hypothetical rather than wishful thinking :).
122

Alan B,

20/11/2008 16:04:15
#The Federalist

"Where larger countries have an advantage is the uk will always be able to finance a bail out of say RBS more than scotland will."

Good to see you can dig out my old comments. Do you bookmark them :). Would not bother far to verbose and far too many typos to be understandable.

Still agree with that statement above that it would always be easier for the uk government to bail out a company the size of RBS than a scottish government. I have not changed my position on that.


123

TWC,

20/11/2008 16:49:51
I just heard Max King on CNBC give his assessment of the Fiscal expansion policy; He said it was suicidal, then on Bloomberg Vince Cable said that fiscal expansion was a nit but the failure to free up the Banking was a major problem and the Banks were doing what they wanted.

Like the guy earlier on here I'm going to have a good look at where I put my money in future -- pittance though it be.
124

Benefits scrounging toilet cleaner ,

20/11/2008 17:09:41
I'm on benefits and vote for the SNP. I've no education, decency or prospects, why shouldn't I get some of your money that you worked for?
125

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

20/11/2008 17:25:16
#145

Not a database - just a very good memory for a relatively recent commnet.

Mind you, it was easy to remember because you are the only nationalist I have read who has admitted that the UK could have any sort of advantage over Scotland.

Such honesty is refreshing.

PS You're still wrong with your HBOS hypothesis.

;)
126

the.ally ,

max. 20/11/2008 17:35:56
'S & M sevenwivesme', you blag the most utter rubbish I've ever heard on these forums.

You seem to have an 'expert' opinion on every subject matter. However, I notice the Bliar predisposition in ALL your answers, statements, and general tosh utterances; the Tony Bliar washie syndrone.
Roll-up, roll-up, Roll-up for the best new washing powder ever to be invented. This washing powder will wash any stain away that you want it to. Just put the stain in the 'machine', tip in the New Labour stain remover poweder called 'deflect-decieve-deny', and when the spin-cycle has finished your stain has been eradicated. Roll-up, Roll-up, Roll-up for Tony Bliar's new labour stain-washing, stress-saving, and universal magic potion; USE DEFLECT-DECEIVE-DENY AS A NEW ALBOUR SAVING DEVICE.
127

TWC,

20/11/2008 17:36:25
149 Benefits scrounging toilet cleaner
You are interrupting two of the honest posters here does Murphy know you can write
128

Benefits scrounging toilet cleaner ,

20/11/2008 17:45:14
It's a free country TWC.

I'm free to come on here and annoy everyone who doesn't support independence.

We come on every day and do that. We've taking the "o" out of country when the Union is broken.

Death to the King! All heil mother mary. Yee-ha, I'm not a delusional fool, I'm a big political blogger and on benefits.

Vote SNP! Sister party of BNP.
129

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 20/11/2008 17:52:53
If you are employed as a toilet cleaner then you would actually be a benefit ''cheat'' wouldn't you ? Using your kind of language. There is no relationship between the BNP and SNP, you demonstrate further your utter stupidity by posting that.
130

the.ally ,

max. 20/11/2008 18:10:32
Oh-Yeh, why did the dundee prosecutors office lie about a guy being remanded in prison when his charge was dropped 5 weeks ago! This guy spent 5 weeks in prison when his charge was actually dropped 5 weeks ago. His case came to court and the dundee fiscals office made up some stupid and rahter childish and ridiculous excuse that they 'faxed the prison to release the gy' What utter rubbish. The protocol for the release of prisoners because charges are dropped isn't to fax the prison, so why did they do it?

I'll tell you, it's because the criminal justice system in scotland is actually 'criminal'.
Yes, that's right, all Scotland's prosecution offices have been subject to elish angiolini's 'fock them, let them rot in prison' attitude. angiolini has instilled this 'criminal' attitude in her nasty way prosecutors 'demand' sentences from sheriff courts and sheriffs now. It's a trickle-down effect coming right from the top. A female sheriff told a guy that when she sent him to prison, 'he deserves anything that happens to him while he's in prison', effectually saying, she wanted the screws to get the 'prison-hall bouncers' to beat the guy up. I mean, what kind of justice system is this? elish angiolini is to blame for this 'criminal' and despotic justice system scotland has now. A guy spends 5 weeks in prison for nothing while dundee prosecutors laugh their hinees off; WTF?

And, why did angiolini let 'dundee dottie off with criminal charges?

Scotland has a 'criminal' justice system, and the hub of it is in dundee!

And, I know you're hacking-in to my computer; yer a weasel and a fake S & M sevenwivesme.
131

brownlie,

20/11/2008 18:12:00
153 Bstc

You sound an ideal candidate for the next vacancy for a New Labour MP. With your experience of benefit scrounging, your expense account, with a little help from Lord George, should be of great advantage in adding to the luxury you currently enjoy under our socialist Labour Party.

Come and join, united we'll scrounge.
132

the.ally ,

max. 20/11/2008 18:23:00
I love it when we get the real delusionals on; they are a real laugh.

Are you Brown-the-Clown?

What's your advice on buying stocks just now?

Is it prudent to buy 'goods', or 'services'?

Is Google a top buy?
133

Ewan Oosami,

20/11/2008 18:41:30
I have received what can only be described as a small forest of bumf regarding the acquisition of HBOS, in the Q & A part some of the questions were worded as if the shareholders of HBOS had already agreed to it. My voting forms have been sent back as a resounding NO to all resolutions. Pity there wasn't a question like "do you approve of Hornsbys obscene pay package"
The whole thing is a stitch-up started long before this credit crunch
134

zeitgeist,

Scotland 20/11/2008 19:03:31
No surprise given the manipulation of the take over engineered by Broon.
135

the.ally ,

max. 20/11/2008 19:23:05
S & M sevenwivesme, yer a complete and utter blagger that gets off on spoutin' aff.

do you stand in the middle of the bar and shout, 'Yeh, an' I told 'm he wiz wrang; and that shut 'im up'

Ye'r ra wally pally.

besides, i think mine is better, Sado-maschist seven wives me is a bit more like you, isn't it. I mean you're the type to stand in the bar spouting guff, more guff, and then, guess what, EVEN MORE GUFF.

I bet the locals are brain-dead listening to you.

Tell me S & M, is it true that ten egg-farts, in one minute, are more welcome than you in your local bar?

136

brownlie,

20/11/2008 19:23:34
160 sm753

He's living proof that our "Education, education, education" and "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime" policies are working.
137

the.ally ,

max. 20/11/2008 19:29:08
I'm luvin' this cyber-trashin' of the Sado-masichist, but ye'r nae fun when it comes to cyber-trashin';

yer just no' good enuff.
138

the.ally ,

max. 20/11/2008 19:31:10
browner, WTF are ye goin' on aboot?

tiwat!
139

brownlie,

20/11/2008 19:36:37
166 the .ally

You sound like a nice chap.
140

the.ally ,

max. 20/11/2008 19:46:20
Aye,
Nice, but no' dim!
Good, but no' prude.
Fine, but no' sublime.

I'm good enough to fight for Scotland's independence; politics or, 'anything it takes to make sure Scotland gets independence'. Paraphrasing Brown-the-Clown.

141

brownlie,

20/11/2008 19:55:40
169 sm753

Collapse of stout party? Was it too much Guinness or Murphys?
142

Westfield Bairns,

falkirk 20/11/2008 21:01:05
Ah so the usual Unionists are on tonight with their objective comments. Reality check here for them. The English tend to think of British as English and most Scots, well, think of themselves as Scottish. Interesting where the Scottish Unionist fits in, well they in reality are the bottom feeders who tend to be held in contempt by both sides.
I also have to dissapoint the bottom feeders as Scottish Independence will come i have no doubt it's just a matter whether Scotland OR England vote for it. Well have to go as i'm away to join the Campaign for an English Parliament
143

Conan the Librarian™,

20/11/2008 21:45:30
170
Stout party?
I think he meant wide in the Beam(ish).
144

the.ally ,

max. 21/11/2008 00:26:31
Sado-the-Masichist said, "I pointed out the illogicality and factual inaccuracy of his position; collapse of stout party."
And not shouting across the room, surely."

allymax says, what the fock are on about you tiwat?

You make no sense at all Sado.

This is your logic Sado; think of a number, multiply it by 3, divide it by 4, subtract 753, then add 4.
Your answer should be you have left!

I mean, yer a complete tiwat Sado!
145

Vaward,

21/11/2008 01:46:20
# 147

Good point about the US T Bonds, Richard. How the worm has turned, eh? After WW2 we owed the US a fortune now they owe us a fortune. I'm also pretty sure that that $338 billion can be turned into cash at anytime. Someone might correct me on that.
146

Haggis MacBagpipes,

Central Canada - ex Perth & Glesca' 21/11/2008 23:08:37
How about a little humour?
Siamese twins walk into a pub in Ontario and park themselves on a bar stool.
One of them says to the innkeeper, "Don't mind us, we're joined at the hip.
I'm Joe, he's Jim, we'll have two Molson Canadian beers, draft please"

The innkeeper, feeling slightly awkward, tries to make polite conversation while pouring the beers.

"Been on holiday yet, boys?"

"Off to England next month," says Joe. "We go to England every year and hire a car and drive for miles, don't we, Jim?"

Jim agrees.

"Ah, England,"says the innkeeper." Wonderful country the history, the beer, the culture..."

"Nah, we don't like that British stuff," says Joe.
"Hamburgers & Molson's beer, that's us, eh Jim?
And we can't stand the English - they're arrogant and rude.'

"So why keep going to England?" asks the innkeeper.

Joe replies, "It's the only chance Jim gets to drive."
--------------------------
Cheers,
Haggis MacBagpipes™©

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

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.