Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Bank of China walks away from HBOS deal 'after Treasury cold shoulder'

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

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: 12 November 2008
A PROPOSED Bank of China bid to buy HBOS has been called off, it emerged yesterday.
The Scotsman has learnt China's second-biggest bank made initial inquiries about HBOS following the efforts of Jim Spowart, the financier and founder of Intelligent Finance, but it decided not to proceed with a bid.

Sources close to the deal have alleged that the Bank of China lost interest after being given the cold shoulder by the Treasury, which is supporting the Lloyds TSB takeover of HBOS.

However, this has been denied by Treasury officials who have claimed that their only interest is seeing a package put forward which will provide financial stability. A spokesman said: "We wouldn't stand in the way of a serious alternative bid if one came forward and we certainly haven't put anybody off.

"We just want a stability package and that is what is on the table at the moment and has been backed by both the boards of Lloyds and HBOS."

Nevertheless, concerns have been raised that alternatives to the Lloyds TSB bid, which would see the loss of many Scottish jobs and influence in Edinburgh, are being pushed aside by the UK government.

This comes on the back of serious questions about the deal being raised by The Scotsman ever since it was announced.

Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Tavish Scott said: "My deep concern is that the Prime Minister is pulling every string to stop any other rival bid. Journalists are being briefed, names are being released, bids are being discouraged.

"Vince Cable (the Lib Dem Treasury spokesman] and I asked for a level playing field. There is no such thing from the UK government."

Mr Scott, one of the first politicians to come out against the Lloyds deal, has also pointed out that there is just a month before HBOS shareholders are asked to make a decision and has called on other interested parties to come forward soon.

"With only a month to the shareholders' meeting, time is running out," he said.

Meanwhile, Osama Saeed, from the Islamic Foundation in Scotland, has spoken to interested parties in the Gulf. But he has been told that while they would like to invest in HBOS, as has happened with Barclays, their impression is that the Lloyds deal is a fait accompli.

"The situation is being watched, but the responses I've received are that while there would be interest in principle, it appears very much that this would not be welcomed either by the banks, the government, or both," he said.

The Unite union has backed the Lloyds offer as the only viable option on the table. But the SNP suggested that Unite's comments let down its members and sounded like a defence of the UK government.

In a press conference, Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, claimed the problem was that no serious bid with funding had actually come forward, apart from Lloyds TSB.

He said: "There has been no announcement by any financial institution that it is prepared – apart from Lloyds TSB – to take on the problems as well as the opportunities of HBOS. People have got to be realistic.

"It is not going to change much if one person says he wants to, or they want to, take over a bank if they have got no money behind them."

The continued uncertainty in the markets saw banks under pressure yesterday, with Lloyds TSB down 17.8p at 177.4p. HBOS was 8.5p down at 99.2p.

Tory leader David Cameron also backed the bid and attacked the Scottish Government for holding out for an alternative.

He said: "All the evidence I have is that the best route forward is for Lloyds HBOS to go ahead.

"I do think it's important for politicians not to try and hold out false hopes, as Alex Salmond has frankly been doing in Scotland."

Scotsman opinion leads the way in fight for HBOS …

"The danger in the shotgun marriage between Lloyds TSB and HBOS is that the latter will be dismembered and the Bank of Scotland brand devalued. Yet it is still possible to revise the details of the takeover, which must, in any case, be agreed by HBOS shareholders … The takeover of HBOS has dire implications for the Scottish economy, particularly in Edinburgh."

"It is necessary to look beyond the immediate horror story. When this crisis is over, the financial system will work better if a healthy number of competitors are still standing. A stand-alone HBOS preserved in the near term could find its own feet then, or be sold to a bidder with which there is less overlap. When goals conflict, competition is the surest lodestar."

"Conceived in the crucible of the financial crisis six weeks ago, the proposed takeover of HBOS by Lloyds TSB now looks hasty, maybe even ill-judged.

"A bank with a 30 per cent share of current accounts and a similar presence in the mortgage market will be able to exert huge pricing power. Only investors can block the merger now. Rejecting the deal may lead to share price falls. But it is in the ultimate interests of consumers."


The full article contains 868 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

Edward,

12/11/2008 00:19:18
'Treasury, which is supporting the Lloyds TSB takeover of HBOS'
Treasury are supposedly neutral when it comes to takes over. They should only be interested in the best interests ofthe country and the work force
Unfortunately under Labour and under Gordon Brown in partiular,the Treasury are going out there way to destroy Scottish Banking by all means possible
Brown's attack dog is Yvette Cooper, who has been at the bottom of the breifings given to her husbands freind Robert Peston
When will Scotland waken up? when there is nothing left?
2

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 12/11/2008 00:23:43
On another day the Scotsman would be headlining, in a triumphant manner, that Broon had seen the Chinese off.

Different story now.

Whatever. Broon is playing with the last of his 5 pentacles.

3

Steve A.,

12/11/2008 00:30:03
When it's bad for Scotland you can always rely on the red Tory's and the blue Tory's to close ranks and sell Scotland down the river .

We should start calling Gordon Brown the Hammer o the Scots !

4

Wardog™,

12/11/2008 00:31:06


brown will reap the whirlwind for this and no amount of blind glenrothes voter will prevent the tirade against him from everyday Scots over this treachery
5

Edward,

12/11/2008 00:34:49
If there was ever a case for an investigation into why the Treasury actively discouraged any other bids and to leak to there mouthpiece (Robert Peston) it certainly is this story
6

,

12/11/2008 00:36:50
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
7

Edward,

12/11/2008 00:37:35
A measure of how sick Gordon Brown is, he even has had the unions back his plan for the Lloyds TSB take over of HBOS, which will result in wide scale redundancies, with figures at least around the 20,000 + mark
If anything the Unions should be going out there way to support a bid from a bank that will cause the least amount of redundancies NOT the most!
8

,

12/11/2008 00:40:42
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
9

Steve A.,

12/11/2008 00:41:09
7
Wardog
How long Can this traitor Brown hold the media in his pocket? If i didn't know any better i would say they are complicit in allowing him to rape Scotland .

Scorched earth indeed ....he is being allowed to get away with murder whilst the unionist meeja turns a blind eye .

DISGUSTING !
10

Shamus,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 00:43:51
The SNP would prefer the Chinese to take over the British HBOS. What a bunch of gravediggers. Gordon Brown has had a new hair do. Any of you ladies noticed.
11

,

12/11/2008 00:43:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
12

subrosa,

12/11/2008 00:46:27
The Chinese will get their revenge for being treated with such disdain. Just wait and see ...
13

Edward,

12/11/2008 00:46:50
The only hope left is for the shareholders to reject out right the Lloyds TSB offer, perhaps wishful as regards te big institutions, but you never know.
Realistically what is the point of being taken over by a bank that its self needs money from the government!
If the shreaholders do do the right thing, what is Gordon Brown going to do? round them up and shoot the lot?
14

Brian Hill,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 00:46:56
So the Chinese are idiots and the Gulf State Arabs are idiots because despite our London Treasury being absolutely neutral in these proceedings, the poor naive Chinese and Arabs have somehow or other got the impression they are being given the cold shoulder.

How can this be?

Are they being naive or is the London treasury LYING? Now let me see, that's a hard one.

Only a blinkered idiot will not be able to see that the Treasury at the behest of Brown and Darling is doing it's utmost to push this deal through irrespective of the negative consequences for Edinburgh and Scotland, not to mention shareholders worldwide.

Indeed it's obvious they want to weaken the Scottish finance industry in order to weaken the case for Scottish independence and to hel! with the consequences
15

The Pict.,

Scotland 12/11/2008 00:48:10
No MacSprog. Its YOU who embarrass the real Scots. Get over the 'canny dae that' brainwashing that you have. Upward S.N.P.
16

Steve A.,

12/11/2008 00:52:18
9
Your no Scotsman because if you were you would know that it's not only 17 yr olds that get pleasure from watching engerland getting a gubbing !

Have you ever even visited Scotland ?

Or planet earth even ?
17

,

12/11/2008 00:52:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
18

Edward,

12/11/2008 00:52:44
#15
the choice cannot be more stark
Between HBOS being taken over by Lloyds TSB and having the HQ in Edinburgh close, all head office functions moved to London, at least 20,000 + redundancies
or
HBOS being taken over by a Bank from outside the UK, that does not have any substantial presence in the UK, that provides this non UK Bank with a ready made platform for western banking, have its European HQ set up in the HBOS building on the Mound and only have a handful of redundacies. Keeping banking in Edinburgh
Tough choice, but I would be inclined to go for the Bank of China bid
19

,

12/11/2008 00:53:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
20

Shamus,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 00:58:33
9# Jock you have actually summed up the stupidity of the Nats. The thing is they know they are stupid and continue to work on it.
21

Guga II,

Rockall 12/11/2008 00:59:05
That liar, charlatan and war criminal, Maggie Broon, is determined to sabotage the Scottish financial sector. This is, of course, in line with his statement that he would do everything in his power to mintain the Unionists stranglehold on Scotland.

How this Quisling, who wants to keep Scotland totally subservient to the English imperialists, can live with himself, I do not know. But one thing is for sure, the Scottish people will never forget his treachery, and he is earning his place in history as the most loathed man in the thousands of years of Scottish history.
22

,

12/11/2008 01:08:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
23

Shamus,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 01:08:52
19# 21# Brian is over the Hill and Steve is a bigot but does not know it.
24

,

12/11/2008 01:10:10
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
25

Steve A.,

12/11/2008 01:14:15
Shamus or Jock

Instead of abusing fellow posters why don't you tell me why i should support the union then perhaps we can have a proper grown up debate ?

What say you ladies ?

26

Jock MacSprog,

12/11/2008 01:20:46
35 not telling you you should support anything. I am just telling you why I think that Nats are a bunch of bitter people with chips on shoulders and fantasists. I am also giving up on responding to idiots who question everyones Scottishness. Yeah, I dont have a made up Gaelic name and dont claim to post from the Western Isles so yes, I am not Scottish I guess. Support who you like mate,just live in the real world.
27

Jock MacSprog,

12/11/2008 01:26:25
oh by the way Steve O, is talking about "drubbing Engerland" a "proper grown up debate"? Maybe in pubs of Coatbridge mate, but not here.
28

Forward not Back,

12/11/2008 01:27:31
The real people that should be targeted, should people want to "save" HBoS, are Lloyds TSB shareholders. What's in it for them? If they reject the offer, the government will be forced to nationalise HBoS.

So, it's time to target the institutional shareholders of Lloyds TSB and ask them to pull out.
29

Steve A.,

12/11/2008 01:28:00
Jock
Somehow i knew my question was a waist of time as your retort demonstrates .

I just live in hope chump !
30

Shamus,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 01:30:37
34# Just be honest you are an anti-English Bigot. It is not an offence so admit it. Then perhaps a conversation. Or should I say a National Conversation.
31

Jock MacSprog,

12/11/2008 01:37:10
I guess the head of the trade union UNITE is also in on the Unionist Conspiracy:

"The two Scottish knights who are trying to parachute themselves into the HBOS boardroom were accused yesterday of egotism and arrogance and of hatching an irresponsible plan that could destroy the bank.

The vitriolic attack against Sir Peter Burt and Sir George Mathewson was made by Derek Simpson, joint general secretary of Unite, Britain's biggest union.

Mr Simpson said that the two men were irresponsible for trying to derail the planned takeover of HBOS by Lloyds TSB, a move that he said could destabilise the banking system.

He said: “We have serious concerns that the extreme arrogance of these two individuals will lead to the nightmare scenario in which HBOS collapses.”

32

,

12/11/2008 01:37:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
33

Brian Hill,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 01:39:09
I think if everyone used their own names in these threads the level of debate would improve.

I also think that what they say would carry more weight as coming from real people.

And while I'm on the subject, I don't not believe that journalists should be able to print statements from a 'Party Insider' or 'Senior Aid' to Alex Salmond or Gordon Brown.....

Let's have it all out in the open, if it's worth saying let's know who is saying it.
34

Jock MacSprog,

12/11/2008 01:39:33
Put down the crack pipe Marinka. And then say goodbye.
35

Jock MacSprog,

12/11/2008 01:41:31
50, Steve, is that another example of your "proper grown up debate" ? Your not doing the Nats any favours mate, your playing to the sterotype perfectly. But, please do carry on.
36

Jock MacSprog,

12/11/2008 01:42:47
54, Marinka, a perfect example why parents should monitor the late night use of the internet by their 12 year old children.
37

Steve A.,

12/11/2008 01:52:58
Heres jock at his best

"Nats are a bunch of bitter people with chips on shoulders and fantasists"

"its also fully grown morons such as yourself who also support anyone who play England"

"This is the bitter, brain dead mentality of 17 year old Scottish football supporters who support anyone who plays England "

I rest my case
38

Cpt Incredible,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 01:56:36
Open your eyes Jock,and engage your brain,then maybe you wouldn't come across as such a spineless moron.
39

Dark Lochnagar,

12/11/2008 02:12:21
This will be the same Chinese then who have told Brown not to come back with the begging bowl because they are lending us nothing until we start paying some of what we owe back. Maybe that is why they are getting bad mouthed in the treasury,
40

jerrymanders,

12/11/2008 02:45:39
Is this a takeaway?
41

Guga II,

Rockall 12/11/2008 02:53:12
#32.

We know you're not Scottish. Not only did you admit that once before, but it is blatantly obvious to anyone who reads your Unionist garbage.

Incidentally, I am in the Western Isles, whether you care to believe it or not.

42

donald,

glasgow 12/11/2008 02:55:26
Broon is not in Westminster to represent Scotland.
43

Warden An' All, Reborn,

12/11/2008 03:11:00
Brown puts the interests of Great Britain first, as he said he would, and people are complaining that he is doing what he said he would do. I wish people would make up their minds. These same group of morons usually say he doesn't do what he says. Most people would trust those who do what they say rather than those who can't make up their minds.
44

Can-Scot,

Pickering, Ontario 12/11/2008 03:32:54
#48.

O.K. I found the piano bar. But where are the oysters on the half shell and my champagne?? Perhaps Gordon has them down at the end of the river!!

Seriously, I've said it before so I hope you will all forgive me for repeating myself.

"Seemingly un-related events, (such as the financial disaster that started in the U.S and engulfed most of the world), are driving Scotland inexorably towards Independance."

And to 108 - Why shouldn't we complain about Brown doing what he said he would do, when we knew it was a
back door sell out from the beginning?? Of course we are compaining.



45

Bluevoice,

Dubai, UAE 12/11/2008 04:04:42
PHEW!
46

,

12/11/2008 04:12:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
47

Law abiding ,

Right here 12/11/2008 04:38:35
The Chinese are still an ecomony managed and dictated by a repressive government that does whatever it wants. The businesses there lack transparency and accepted accounting practices. I know.. we haven't done all that well either, but their business buying this one probably isn't that good of a thing anyway. It would invite a whole different set of problems, just not the same exact problems we have now.
48

Mallory,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 05:08:02
...an ecomony managed and dictated by a repressive government that does whatever it wants.

No change there then for us Scots / Brits
49

Bring it Off,

UK 12/11/2008 05:09:40
#112 Law Abiding!

We are discussing the Bank of China on this posting The Bank of China is listed in Hong Kong - same as HSBC and Standard Chartered also UK Banks - transparent as the FTSE and the NYSE.

Bank of China is also the 5th largest bank in the world by market capitalization value.

You could say the British are managed and dictated by a represive regime and no one would argue.

Baby beaten to death, shootings, stabbings, old people scared to go out, give me Shanghai anyday.
50

Bring it Off,

UK 12/11/2008 05:15:10
#111 absolutely spot on it is the Imperial divide and conquer tactics used all over the colonial world that the English have used and the Scottish suckers cannot see the wood for the tree because they are watching Eastenders or X factor.

Scotland a country surrounded by Oil and Gas, seas and rivers full of the best fish, plentiful fresh water, enough agricultural land to be self sufficient and export the surplus,cutting edge medical research and treatments, cutting edge IT and R and D in IT and technology....but dont you Scottish plebs ever think that you could run your own country for one minute as the ONE EYED MAN IS KING IN THE LAND OF THE BLIND AND IN NUMBER 10 IS THE ONE EYED MAN
51

karin.m,

12/11/2008 06:42:45
The reason gordon brown wants the deal between hbos and loyds to go ahead is because he does not care that the majority of people in scotland want the bank to remain independent. Gordon brown is determined to ruin the scottish economy.
52

Angleland Isover,

12/11/2008 06:45:48
Maggie Broon is a one eyed snake.
53

Law abiding ,

Still here 12/11/2008 07:06:15
#114 You ought to take Shanghai then. Go where you want. You can do that from here.
While we can't say we have total, unbrideld democracy or lack of institutional abuse it does not approach the repression of the Chinese party. Be real. Take for example how the Chinese government restricts the internet. They also engage in capital puishment for a long list of crimes; without an appeal before being lead from the courtroom and shot in the head. The differences in government are significant by a large degree. Some of our complaints sound the same, but pale in comparrison. They are severe, draconian and authortarian in a way we started dealing with in the 13th century. They have a way to go. So cleaning-up their companies is not #1 on their list. Do your due dilligence.
And being listed on the major exchanges does not imply that a company has good books, accounting, access to management by analysis or even your best interest at heart. They represent the Chinese government, don't forget that that government has priorities that probably don't include raising the standard of living for Scots. They see an area to exploit. That's all, it's the lesser of two evils equation, except there will be a host of problems that they bring with them that we probably don't see right now. They are not the white knight. Only wanted to make sure we were clear on that. The article leaves a little to be desired from an investigative point of view. Light on relevant details.
54

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 07:15:34
116 karin.m
"Gordon brown is determined to ruin the scottish economy."

If this is the case why is he spending £31bn of taxpayers money to bail-out RBS and HBOS?

That is a rather bizarre way of trying to ruin and economy?
55

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 07:23:04
Scotland, not one bank to it's name and mission accompliashed by Brown.

A great day for the union, will see Edinburgh soon like inner city Coventry and all thanks to the union!
56

Angleland Isover,

12/11/2008 07:31:37
Ugly George wake up he doesn't want to bail out Scottish banks he wants to buy them for his adopted angland.
57

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 07:32:46
121 Nevski
"Scotland, not one bank to it's name"

Bank of Scotland and Royal Bank of Scotland will still exist. RBS will still be a company and BoS wil be part of the Lloyds group of companies.

58

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 07:37:46
Of all the issues recently this one has sorted the men/women from the boys/girls. The SNP have been caught out horribly here, we now have the revolting spectacle of Mr Salmond left swinging in the breeze, a largely irrelevant character reduced to mouthing platitudes and trying to get into the headlines by saying anything to get him noticed.
The SNP attack dogs, such as they are, emabrrass themselves and Mr Salmond by their pathetic attempts to score cheap points over this crisis and their quite frankly juvenile personal attacks on Mr Brown say more about themselves then anything else.
This is a time for serious people dealing with serious issues. Infantile pointscoring and snide name-calling should be left in the student bars where they belong. The fact that the nats can't quite rise above the sneering will be costly for them.
This more than anything will contribute to their support crashing.
59

,

12/11/2008 07:38:56
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
60

,

12/11/2008 07:42:28
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
61

,

12/11/2008 07:45:21
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
62

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 07:45:42
121 George#

BOS will not exist, Daniels has already said the name will go but if you believe that keeping the name BOS to appease the jocks is enough then i am sure Daniels would be happy people like you are about in Scotland.

124 Grahma#

No-one in the SNP is as embarassing to their country as people like you, the unionist aplologists.

Brown has scuppered the deal, the SNPO know it, the Bank of China knows it, the Lib Dems know it, Vince Cable knows it and Jim Spoward knows it...only you it seems are unable to understand.

This is Browns doing and the Labour party's, it occurred within the union and the union has cost Scotland thousands of jobs.

They (and you) are an absolute disgrace to their country!
63

,

12/11/2008 07:46:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
64

,

12/11/2008 07:47:14
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
65

,

12/11/2008 07:49:31
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
66

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 07:50:38
128
Nevsky,
Until another offer comes up, backed by serious funding then this is all just conversation. No other serious bidder has come forward. The government's priority is stabilising our banking sector. It is vital for our economy that this is successful. Playing silly games to score cheap points is the sort of narrow-minded short-sighted posturing that could cost us dearly. Let's just hope that the only cost of this shenanigans is at the ballot box and the people punish the nats for their tomfoolery.
67

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 07:51:26
130 Rufus#

A sweet. Rufus has another little unionist friend to play with and will creep and crawl to him like he usually does.

No girlfriend yet Rufus? Your sparkling personality, wit and intelligence still holding you back a little?
68

,

12/11/2008 07:51:49
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
69

Finnzz,

12/11/2008 07:51:50
If Brown succeeds in his denouement, you can kiss goodbye to any chance of Scotland proving its ability to stand on its own feet.
Make no mistake, this is deliberate. This is the moment and situation that Brown has been waiting thirty years for.
70

TWC,

Ayrshire 12/11/2008 07:53:06
Grahamski. Rufus,

I don't know what side you are on here, this is nothing to do with SNP or wee eck. The domino effect from HBoS will be devastating in Edinburgh.
I am ok none of this is going to affect me but young families are going to feel this bad.
Remember High service industry dependence will make it especially bad all over Scotland.
Whatever you think of this the Barnett pocket money will not give Scotland the ability to improve things.
We cannot direct Finance to fix this in Scotland our hands are tied.
71

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 07:56:28
132 Grahamski#

The bidders did not come forward because as iw written in the article eveyone is under the impression that this is a done deal.

Read tha article above.

Brown could never go back on the deal and more than anything he is doing this to save face..let's not forget also that the head of Lloyds counts Brown as a personal friend and so does Daniels.


'Vital for our economy that this is successful'?????

What does that mean? The only successs out of this will be London with the bank moved wholesale into your mother city.

Great news for London!
72

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 08:00:20
128 Nevski
BoS will not form part of the name of the overall company but it will still be used as a trading name for operations in Scotland. The situation will be the same as that of Clydesdale bank which kept the trading name after it was taken over by an Australian Bank.

The situation will, therefore, not be substantially different from that which exists now. BoS is part of a bigger group and much of the corporate decision making is undertaken by the "Halifax" aspect of the business and hence is done outside Scotland anyway.

Also RBS will continue with its HQ in Edinburgh. You should take account of the details before you make inaccurate, emotive comments like "Scotland , not one bank to its name"
73

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 08:00:52
137
Nevsky,
'Vital for our economy that this is successful'?????

What does that mean?'

You seriously don't know why our banking sector must be stabilised? If that's the case then what on earth are you wasting peoples time with your self-confessed ignorance?
You also seem to be suggesting that this all comes down to the prime minister and the head of Lloyds beind 'friends'. Where do you get your business news, Heat magazine?
74

tartan army 2222,

12/11/2008 08:02:12
*****
Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Tavish Scott said: "My deep concern is that the Prime Minister is pulling every string to stop any other rival bid. Journalists are being briefed, names are being released, bids are being discouraged.

"Vince Cable (the Lib Dem Treasury spokesman] and I asked for a level playing field. There is no such thing from the UK government."
*****

Are the Libs finally waking up to what the Labour Party are doing to Scotland in an effort to promote their anti-SNP, anti-independence agenda?
75

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 08:05:22
137 nevski
If HBOS is a viable entity, there is nothing to stop Bank of China or anybody else making a bid. The final decision rests with the shareholders and Gordon Brown cannot coerce the shareholders no matter how many conspiracy theories you fire out.

Please look at the realities of the situation.
76

gus1940,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 08:14:23
The stink surrounding this whole business gets stronger every day.

Waken up Scotland - Brown is trying to destroy Scotland's economy.
77

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 08:17:44
141 George#

'there is nothing to stop Bank of China or anybody else making a bid'

Do all unionists have a problem reading today or do they simply not want to recognise the facts.

George READ THA ARTICLE..Bank of China walked away because they believe that the Lloyds bid is a done deal..done between the PM and his chums!
78

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 08:24:31
138 George#

I am making a statement of fact. HBOS will become Lloyds and will not exist as an independent bank and will be moved wholesae to London.

RBS will be 60% owned by the government (Scotlands share 5%-6%)...that makes it NO LONGER AN INDEPENDENT bank.

Scotland has no CENTRAL BANK.

Therefore George..as i stated before Scotland will not have 1 bank to it's name that is either state owned (by the Scottish people) or a fully functioning independent Scottish bank.

Those are facts! Name me one other country in Europe in the same situation?
79

Courtney,

East Molesey 12/11/2008 08:25:21
All smoke and mirrors!
80

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 08:30:10
143 Nevski
Please learn more about these matters before you resort to insults. According to the article Osama Saeed stated that investores fro the middle east had been interested but were not because they felt it was a "fait accompli"

I did read the article and you are presuming that Osama Saeed is a reliable source. But the fact remains. Another bank is free to put in an offer. If it can put in another offer wich is preferable to the LLoyds one then the shareholders are free to reject the Lloyds offer and opt for another.

The takeover cannot be a "done deal" as you have described it as both sets of shareholders have to vote on it.
81

subrosa,

12/11/2008 08:39:15
# 148

Of course it's a done deal. Shareholders aren't getting full information, the blurb just says that the deal is the best they'll get. The problem is too many shareholders have shares in both businesses.

As for Robert Peston something ought to be done to insist this bloke names his sources before he speaks. He's dangerous at the moment but labour will stick the knife in shortly so he'd best beware.
82

DaveK,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 08:39:18
I think it would be best all round for a few people on here to pop down to their local Homebase, buy some shovels and pics and pop over the wall and attack England, just get it out of your system. We will thank you, your families will probably be grateful of the break and your heed doctors will see it as an occupational therapy. Of course, you can always come back on here to let us know when you get your erses kicked, nothing new there.
83

DaveK,

12/11/2008 08:42:16
Sorry Hombase is English, better make it Dobbies
84

DaveK,

12/11/2008 08:42:34
oops Dobbies owned by Tesco, better make it....?
85

john z,

edinburgh 12/11/2008 08:43:06
As I posted yesterday, english government diplomats have been using every trick and diplomatic lever to ensure China backs out of this.

This is a disgrace, and Brown and Labour will never be forgiven for this. Traitor Brown and the english government which runs Scotland will do anything to make the Lloyds deal go through. When bank staff in Scotland and Halifax get their P45's in January, they should write to personally thank the arrogant traitor that is Gordon Brown.

This union with england does nothing for Scotland or Scottish jobs, and by staying in the union, Scots will continue to lose out. The priority of the english government is the voters of south east england and London. Scottish bank staff are just playthings in a bigger game by Brown.

Times are hard, and scotland can no longer afford this wasteful undemocratic union. Scotland doesn't need england, but england needs Scotlands oil.
86

Chris Mitchell,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 08:44:24
It will be a sad day if this takeover goes through although as each day goes by the alternate options are looking less and less likely.
Lloyds TSB - HBOS is going to be the reality and its going to have a devastating effect on Edinburgh, with it likely that many Scottish Jobs will be shipped down south.
The shareholders, certainly the large institutional shareholders don't care about that, they've already agreed to vote yes to the deal, the campaign for the independent shareholders means little as they haven't got the power to stop this.
Alex Salmond knows that there is nothing we can do to stop this awful deal and he's been trying his best to try and secure Scottish jobs, while he gets sniped at for not fighting hard enough to keep HBOS independent.
Lets face facts the Scottish Government has no power over our own finances, they can't authorize a bailout of HBOS or I suspect they would have done so long ago.
All we can now hope is that the bloodshed of job losses directly and indirectly is not too great, but I fear that Edinburgh is going to lose its status as a financial services capital of Europe.
87

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 08:44:25
144 Nevski
"Scotland has no CENTRAL BANK."

A central bank is in charge of a currency and sets the interest rstes for that currency. As many EU countries use the euro their central bank is the ECB. So France, germany, Italy, Spain, The Netherlands and many more do not have their own central banks.

Also you are confusing ownership with location. RBS may be majority owned outside Scotland if the govt takes a 60% stake but what was the situation before? It was owned by its shareholders who were located all over the world and only a minority of the shares would have been held in Scotland.

88

Rob,

12/11/2008 08:44:34
I don't believe one word of this article. This is called letting you down slowly - there was never anything there. Spowart, just like Burt and Mathewson, has nothing to offer to shareholders or to Scotland.

For the Nationalists in our mists you should get on with RBS and be thankful the UK government can bail you out- something Scotland can never do. But, when you complete your master plan you can drop the "Royal" tag and call it BoS if you like - after you've paid out the 99% of shareholders who are not Scottish, that is.
89

john z,

edinburgh 12/11/2008 08:45:47
What a dirty bunch Labour have become. The party that should be fighting for Scottish jobs is actually using every trick to completely destroy the Scottish economy.

So, who do London Labour actually represent???
90

Marian,

12/11/2008 08:51:31
Gordon Brown claims that only the UK could have saved RBS and HBOS from bankrupcy as it would have been beyond the means of an independent Scotland to do so.

What Gordon Brown doesn't say of course, is that the bankrupcy of RBS and HBOS has only occurred because in the past 11 years he has gambled Las Vegas style with the UK economy and lost - big time.

Part of his gamble was to do away with any vestige of statutory financial regulation, in the mistaken belief that the market would regulate itself.

As a consequence the UK under Gordon Brown is in the worst economic condition by far of any G7 country. Consequently Scotland is in a far worse economic condition than countries which are comparable to Scotland such as Norway, Ireland, Denmark, etc.

As part of his master plan Gordon Brown bullied the UK financial institutions into lending money to people who clearly couldn't afford to pay the loans back if and when the boom time in property prices ended.

HBOS then hired a guy from ASDA who had no previous banking experience who had the bright idea of running HBOS into the ground by concentrating the business on selling Gordon Brown's toxic loans.

This economically incompetent New Labour led UK government with its media stooges, together with the failed HBOS management who are guilty of bringing the bank to its knees, now have the bare-faced cheek to criticise the plans to save 20,000 HBOS jobs in Scotland by renowned Scots financial experts who actually know how to run banks successfully.

New Labour have lied to us, not once, but repeatedly for more than a decade. And now all the lies are being exposed. The myth of Brown's economic "genius" is coming tumbling down and the whole shoddy edifice of debt-ridden idiocy is displayed for all of us to see.

Gordon Brown claims that the present economic crisis is all the fault of a big boy who did it and ran away, but we all know now that the big boy who did it is still sitting for the time being in 10
91

Marian,

12/11/2008 08:51:53
continued.......

Gordon Brown claims that the present economic crisis is all the fault of a big boy who did it and ran away, but we all know now that the big boy who did it is still sitting for the time being in 10 Downing Street.
92

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 08:52:36
157 john z
"every trick to completely destroy the Scottish economy."

Really. Do these tricks involve forking out £31bn of taxpayers money to give to RBS and HBOS?

93

john z,

edinburgh 12/11/2008 08:55:00
156

In an independent Scotland, this wouldn't have happened. Brown caused the mess, and now he and his english Labour chums want to ACTIVELY obliterate the Scottish banking sector, just to try to stop independence for Scotland.

I ask again, who do London Labour really represent, because right now they rae doing everything in their power to ensure 20 000 bank staff in Scotland and Halifax get a P45 for christmas.

Gordon Brown is a traitor, and history will show that the deception in this has been as great or greater than the blatant lies and deception regarding the McCrone report.

The english union is dragging Scotland down. The english union is a luxury hard working Scots cannot afford. Time to Jettison this undemocratic and english biased union.

Scotland is the only oil producing nation in the world that happily gives ALL its oil and gas away for nothing to a neighbouring country. And still the english whinge about Scots - they should be happy we give them all our oil and gas for free.

Scotland loses by staying in this old colonial union, it's time to move on.

And get the nuclear subs out of the clyde, Scotland doesn't need them.
94

Ctinj,

Alloa 12/11/2008 08:55:31
'The Unite union has backed the Lloyds offer as the only viable option on the table'

Aye and then when the find that hundreds are to be made redundant they'll call a strike. Its the only thing Unite know at the moment - Stagecoach workers offered 4.5% backdated to April this year and 5% next year, and they are striking.

Come on Unite get real, you are calling for strikes against pretty good deals. Better to have a job than face redundancy at the moment I say.

End to Unite I say
95

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 09:01:39
158 Marian
"plans to save 20,000 HBOS jobs in Scotland by renowned Scots financial experts who actually know how to run banks successfully."

The 20,000 figure is the suggested figure for job losses on the whole of the UK. As LLoyds TSB and halifax have many duplicate functions in England and Wales many of the job losses will occur there.

Also, if you learnt something of the background of Peter Burt and George Matthewson, you would realise how inappropraite your comments are. Matthewson was in charge of RBS when it took over Nat West with the result that there wer 18,000 job losses. And you want to portray him as a saviour of jobs. Burt was in charge of BOS when it merged with Halifax - more job losses.

So these are the two individuals who set Bos and RBS on their path of expansion. An expansion that went horribly wrong for both companies.

As you can see the reality of the situation is rather different from the one you portray.
96

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 09:04:47
161 john z
"Brown caused the mess, and now he and his english Labour chums want to ACTIVELY obliterate the Scottish banking sector"

Putting £31bn of taxpayers money into something is a starnge way of trying to "obliterate" it.
97

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 09:08:11
160 George#

How many banks have Ireland lost again? Ireland as an independent country has played a canny hand and not 1 bank has gone; Scotland in the union loses the lot!

Ireland is in a position to defend it's baks, it's economy and it's jobs for the benefit of all of the citizens of Ireland.

Scotland, in the union, has no power, no bargaining chips and stands by while Wesminster sanctions the worst possible deal for the country.

Everyone sees it and everyone knows it. You would be quite happy to see Scotland run into the ground as long as your union was maintained, your position is quite clear.
98

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 09:08:31
158/159
Marian,
You claimed:
'As part of his master plan Gordon Brown bullied the UK financial institutions into lending money to people who clearly couldn't afford to pay the loans back...'
Who on earth do you think believes this deluded paranoid nonsense?
Apart from the Inverstoorie branch of the Alba Liberation Front that is......
It really has come down to the nats howling at the moon as the world moves on.....
99

Calum10,

12/11/2008 09:09:10
Gordon Brown does really hate Scotland. He hates Scotland so much that he is making every effort to see thousands of Scots lose their jobs. What an utterly nasty piece of work Gordon Brown is.
100

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 09:09:23
165 Ugly#

If he didn't the fallout ould be a lot worse, Brown had no choice unless he was to be held liable for the trillion of debt like Iceland!
101

St Andrew,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 09:10:49
I cannot understand all the fuss - HBOS is in trouble because of its own financial mismanagement. It is lucky it was saved by the government and that was only possible because of a United Kingdom. If Scotland had been on its own the Bank would have gone to the wall. What is the difference between LloydsTSB taking over or another bank? Whatever happens the main centre wil move away from Scotland. Thats what happend when the BOS merged with Halifax (who in Scotland complained about that) And wasn't the TSB a Scottish bank? What harm was done by its merger with LLoyds? The only other option is for HBOS to remain on its own - but after what happened who would trust them? As for Banks being frightened off - money talks and if Bank of China or any other was serious they would go ahead no matter what the treasury said.
102

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 09:11:31
The unionists today really do remnd me of those little Rabbits in Watership Down desperatly trying to make sense of the bulldozers in their field and scuttling off back to the burrows to cower.
103

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 09:13:24
170 Andrew#

Nonsense, Scotland woud have guaranteed the savings and if the worst cam to it then it would have issued bonds just like the uk has done.

Where do you think the UK got the money? From it's piggy bank?

There is no money, that is why they have raisied it through selling government bonds, exactly the same as Scotland would have done of needed!
104

Marian,

12/11/2008 09:13:30
There is no doubt that Gordon Brown is personally to blame for Britain's desperate economic situation. He is a complete charlatan as he postures about the UK and World stage seeking to position himself as leading a one-man campaign to bring in tougher regulation of the financial services industry when there is overwhelming evidence in his speeches and writings over the past 11 years that he wanted little or no regulation. Since Gordon Brown took control of the UK economy in 1997, debt for individuals (as opposed to government debt) has almost trebled to £1,580 billion which is more than the UK’s total economic output. It is the highest household borrowing that Britain or any G7 country has ever seen. The lending nevertheless carried on recklessly under Gordon Brown. The tripartite structure of regulators he set up did not properly monitor how such financial institutions might find the money. Under Gordon Brown the UK recklessly allowed its own banks to become the most leveraged of any in Europe other than Iceland.

Gordon Brown has also repeatedly claimed that the crisis to the UK economy and banking system had been imported from the USA, but these are the IMF warnings which give the lie to his protestations of innocence:

1) Dec 2003 IMF gives Brown borrowing warning

2) Sep 2005 IMF report warning over £1 trillion mountain of debt

3) Sep 2005 Brown besieged over growth and borrowing plans

4) Dec 2005 IMF fires new warning over Britain's finances

5) Sep 2006 IMF warns over possible UK property crash

6) Oct 2007 IMF report UK house market is 'heading for crash'

7) Apr 2008 IMF: UK vulnerable to US-style housing slump

This October, the IMF said that the UK was worst placed of all the major economies to weather the coming recession.
105

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 09:20:46
169 Nevski
Indeed so. But who were the major culprits in bringing this situation about - RBS and HBOS? And who set the companies RBS and BoS on their route of aggressive expansion - George Matthewson and Peter Burt.

Yet somehow these two are now being portrayed as the saviours of HBOS (which is in a particularly bad way) with vague talk of some other offer which does not materialise. Then, when this offer and no other appears, it is claimed that this is all some Gordon Brown conspiracy despite the fact that he has had to fork out £31bn to rectify the mistakes of these two banks.
106

Marian,

12/11/2008 09:22:34
See http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2545296/sterling-plummets-on-the-back-of-browns-debtfuelled-economy.thtml for a damning analysis of the true state of the UK economy.

Quote:- “The sterling crash has now begun in earnest. The pound has today (today!) fallen 9% against the Yen and is off 4% against the dollar to a lowly $1.56 with forecasts of $1.40 or lower next year. Against any other currency you may mention, it’s now plunging. The proximate cause is news that the UK economy is shrinking far faster than expected, and there's talk about a 0.75-point interest rate cut - sooner rather than later. But on a wider prospective, this is the markets commenting more articulately than the Tories on Gordon Brown’s “scorched earth” economic policy. It is becoming clearer that Britain is perhaps in the worst position of any developed economy in this crisis. Markets are not fooled by Brown’s mendacious claims to have reduced the national debt to 37% of GDP, and will be alarmed to see a Prime Minister use debt concealment methods that would shame the most spivvy merchant bank. Official national debt was 43% before the bank bailouts of two weeks ago, and will be well over 100% if one counts PFI, B&B and the pension liabilities.

Debt is how Brown governed. It was his dope. It’s the key to understanding the UK economy in the last decade and the reckless nature of Brown’s short-termist policies. Debts are steroids to unscrupulous policymakers as debt-fuelled asset bubbles give a fake feeling of prosperity, which usually translates into votes for the ruling party. That’s why Britain started this credit crunch with the largest household debt ever seen in any G7 country. Brown gambled the UK economy on a hunch that interest rates would stay low. It has failed, and now the UK public finances are going to hell in a handcart. We’re being led by a Prime Minister who ran up a 3% deficit in the boom years and we’re now looking a deficit hitting 7% by the 2010 general election
107

Marian,

12/11/2008 09:22:57
continued....
.
I would love to hear Brown explain why sterling’s crash is a problem that started in America. It’s a problem that started in 11 Downing Street – when he decided to conceal debt, leverage up the British economy and personally design a banking regulatory structure that allowed UK banks to be literally the most leveraged out of any outside Reykjavik. Britain is, in many ways, becoming the new Iceland. So the fall in the pound will have some time to run yet.”
108

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 09:25:47
173 Marian
I am not a fan of Gordon Brown's handling of the economy but it has to be appreciated that the problems of HBOS and RBS were largely of their own making. Other banks have not faired as badly.

If there were all the warnings over excessive credit in the UK why did the boards of these two companies take notice of them and control their operations accordingly. There is only so much blame you can put at the feet of the govt.
109

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 09:27:18
173 Marian
oops sorry error
That should read "why did the boards of these two companies NOT take notice"
110

Marian,

12/11/2008 09:32:40
Brown has repeatedly claimed that the crisis to the UK economy and banking system had been imported from the USA, but it has now emerged that one in every five of the UK's mortgages are sub-prime. Northern Rock was the first bank to fall foul of this mis-selling of these sub-prime mortgages. This practice has its origins in Brown's messianic zeal to get so-called “first time buyers” on to the property ladder by over-stretching their financial ability to pay their mortgages.

Recently Brown also tried to re-write history by making the outrageous assertion that he had never claimed to have “ended the cycle of boom and bust” yet there overwhelming written evidence of speeches he has given in the past 11 years where he used those exact words.

There is a serious prospect that Brown will try and inflate his way out of this debt problem, a prospect which terrifies currency dealers. I have heard serious people talking about parity with the dollar before long.
111

The Strategist,

12/11/2008 09:33:08
Unemployment has gone up today to 1.82m representing an increase of 140,000.

Pity they didn't announce this last week.
112

Marian,

12/11/2008 09:35:40
The wheels will come off New Labour's bus in the next 12 months as voters witness famous UK businesses folding on a weekly basis and unemployment rocketing to 1930's levels when the UK recession really begins to take hold.
113

BorderLineScottish,

12/11/2008 09:36:22
Ha, ha! You Nats are velly funny!

Actually this whole thing is getting a bit tedious, as is the constant drivel that comes out of both sides of the argument.

How come the Unionists don't resort to the racial bigotry that the Nats tend to come out with? Could it be that the "Nats" are actually just on here to stir the sh**t?

Anyway, it's irrelevant, as is this board, as is this newspaper. What will be, will be and oh how happy I am that I sneaked away to my little corner of England - not a stone's throw away from a beautiful land occupied by a percentage of neanderthals with large chips on their shoulders. Luckily, the other percentage are a warm, friendly lot.

NEVSKY!!! Is it cold in Moscow? Shouldn't you be tucked up in bed with your cheap Vodka, trying to keep warm?

Ha, ha. Velly funny!!!!
114

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 09:37:43
172 Nevski
"Nonsense, Scotland woud have guaranteed the savings and if the worst cam to it then it would have issued bonds just like the uk has done."

Issuing £31bn in bonds would be the equivalent of issuing over 30% of GDP in one issue. I may be wrong but I am not aware of another country issuing such a large proportion of its GDP in one issue. Also the £31bn would be supplementing any existing national debt. To what lavel of GDP would this have taken total national debt?


115

Marian,

12/11/2008 09:40:14
It is ludicrous for Gordon Brown to go on a borrowing and spending binge while at the same time exhorting the rest of the country to budget carefully.

Those who spend in haste leave the rest of us to repent at leisure - and we're at leisure because the economy has gone down the pan and we don't have a job.

People know that UK government borrowing, debt and spending is out of control, and they know that all three of these have contributed to our current economic crisis.

They also know that Gordon Brown is lying when he claims UK debt is low by international standards. Virtually all economic commentators have pointed out that it is not.

Gordon Brown's pre-election strategy is now clear. Spend, spend, spend and to hell with the long term consequences for it will be his successor who will have to clear up the mess.
116

inkster,

12/11/2008 09:42:11
Gordon Brown is intent on destroying the SNP true.

The first duty of any party political leader is to ensure the party stays in power and he needs the labour vote in Scotland to do that.

Fine. OK. He is the enemy of the SNP. Know thy enemy. He doesn't care about Scotland, or England, he just wants to be PM of Great Britain like Cameron

So if you want to see them off forget about the Banks and dirty tricks - just read on.

I am amazed at the two 'banking knights' having the gall to ask to take over HBOS. They brought both the RBS and HBOS to their knees. WHo would back failures especially ones who had bent the knee to Elizabeth.

HBOS blew it, but had there been a de facto Scots Government Llodys would have been taken over. As Victor Blank has pointed out through his stooges they are direct competitors in the High street and what any business need is customers. No customers no business. You can either compete your customers out of business or take them over by fair means or foul or by getting lucky.

Lloyds got lucky. It may be English revenge for Nat West but the English were lucky in that they had a political leader who depended on Scottish votes to survive. I doubt if Cameron would have resisted the OFT and hung on so tenaciously.

The problem is the redundancies but that will be put on ice until after the next UK general election.

I hate to say it but it's game, set and match to Gordon on HBOS.

RBS will survive but the HQ will go to London like Britoil was engineered out of Glasgow by privatisation to BP. It's staff will bleed away from London and all the 'English, South Africans, Kiwis, Aussies, a few Yanks, French yea and Scots will depart as I quote McSprog of 'bitter brain dead mentality' ( how can anyone will take unionists seriously if they use these kind of pejorative adjectives and I mean the same for the SNP too).

We lost this battle but we only have to vote SNP at the next election to get rid of Brown permanently. Vote for
117

inkster,

12/11/2008 09:43:56
Gordon Brown is intent on destroying the SNP true.

The first duty of any party political leader is to ensure the party stays in power and he needs the labour vote in Scotland to do that.

Fine. OK. He is the enemy of the SNP. Know thy enemy. He doesn't care about Scotland, or England, he just wants to be PM of Great Britain like Cameron

So if you want to see them off forget about the Banks and dirty tricks - just vote SNP.

I am amazed at the two 'banking knights' having the gall to ask to take over HBOS. They brought both the RBS and HBOS to their knees. WHo would back failures especially ones who had bent the knee to Elizabeth.

HBOS blew it, but had there been a de facto Scots Government Llodys would have been taken over - as Victor Blank has pointed out through his stooges they are direct competitors in the High street and what any business need is customers. No customers no business. You can either compete your customers out of business or take them over by fair means or foul or by getting lucky.

Lloyds got lucky. It may be English revenge for Nat West but the English were lucky that they had a political leader who depended on Scottish votes to survive. I doubt if Cameron would have hung on so tenaciously.

The problem is the redundancies but that will be put on ice until after the next UK general election.

I hate to say it but it's game, set and match to Gordon on HBOS.

RBS will survive but the HQ will go to London like Britoil was engineered out of Glasgow by privatisation to BP. It's staff will bleed away from London and all the 'English, South Africans, Kiwis, Aussies, a few Yanks, French yea and Scots will depart as I quote McSprog of 'bitter brain dead mentality' ( how can anyone will take unionists seriously if they use these kind of pejorative adjectives and I mean the same for the SNP too).

/We lost this battle but we only have to vote SNP at the next election to get rid of Brown permanently. Vote for ANYBODY else and I m
118

Marga,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 09:44:44
Extract from HBOS Corporate Responsibility Report 2007:

Our Corporate Responsibility approach focuses on best serving the diverse interests of our key stakeholders. Understanding their views and concerns, about how we are growing the business, helps drive our strategy.

Shareholders• Creating value; governance; sustainability.

Customers• Responsible lending, marketing and advertising; accessibility; value and inclusiveness of products.

Colleagues• Remuneration; employment conditions; culture; diversity.

Environment• Climate change and carbon reduction; paper management; water management.

Community• Economic impact; national and local community programmes; dealing fairly with suppliers.

Our strategy is driven by stakeholder dialogue. The AA1 000 Assurance Standard helps us deliver this.
119

inkster,

12/11/2008 09:45:04
We lost this battle but we only have to vote SNP at the next election to get rid of Brown permanently. Vote for ANYBODY else and I mean Labour, Lib Dems or Conservative will result in a 'Glenrothes' ie Scotland being vassals for England permanently. This is the hour. This is the place.

Vote for your party VOTE SNP or become permanent losers.
120

Iwonder,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 09:55:03
No. 21 re the quotation "One of HBoS's largest institutional shareholders said: "They have no credibility, no support. It is ludicrous. We are not taking the approach remotely seriously." and No 35 "The real people that should be targeted, should people want to "save" HBoS, are Lloyds TSB shareholders. What's in it for them?"

It would be interesting to know how many of the large institutional shareholders hold large shareholdings in both banks. If they do, then it is no wonder that they support the proposed takeover. They would then have a large shareholding in a (combined) bank, which would be free to use it's unfair competitive advantage to increase future shareholder value at the expense of current employees and future consumers! If such a situation exists, these major shareholders (who openly encouraged the past excesses of their senior executives in a drive for ever increasing profits and dividends) may have every reason to support the proposed takeover, at all costs - regardless of any possible benefits to staff and consumers that may be realised by taking a different approach!!
121

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 09:55:21
It will be very difficult for an alternative bid to be put forward because it will be leaked at the initial stage I mean who would a thing like that!! So any investor will be wary.

An approach is made to the treasury, somehow this is leaked out the investor gets nervous, the treasury claim no solid bid has been received.

I wonder why!!

Any departure from the Lloyds deal will be a public humilation for Gordon Brown and so everything will be done to railroad through this deal.

It's a plain as the nose on your face.
122

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 10:05:21
195 Tomrod
"It will be very difficult for an alternative bid to be put forward because it will be leaked at the initial stage"

This is a red herring which appears to have been intoduced by those who seek to explain why no other bid has come forward. There is no inherent reason for the name of a bidder to be kept secret and I am surprised that anyone should suggest so.

When RBS took over Dutch bank ABN Amro it was known that both RBS and Barclays wished to take over the bank. Te RBS offer was preferable to ABN Amro shareholders so that was the one that was accepted.
123

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 10:07:39
196 I think that the Herald has misjudged it's online content as less visitors means less advertising revenue, I was on a thread the other day, the language was okay the "Natzi" or "Braveheart" line wasn't used in the thread and whoosh it was gone.
124

Doh,

12/11/2008 10:08:38
#193

Great post, really examines some of the complex issues.

Its time.
125

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 10:10:53
195 Tomrod
PS
Similarly when RBS took over NatWest it was known that BoS were also seeking to take it over. If you study the history of take overs there is frequently more than one interested bidder and it is well known who they are. For this reason the stories of another bid being undermined by the revealing of its identity do not make sense.
126

KarenL,

12/11/2008 10:12:30
I don't belive this article. The Chinese would not be put off by the Treasury. The Chinese can put the skids under the Government and hold them over a barrel. The Chinese are the UK's principal creditors. They could decide not to buy Treasury notes which the Government has to sell to finance the banking bailouts and roll over the other massive debts which they have accrued. They could also sell sterling assets. If the Government antagonise the Chinese, they may find themselves calling in the IMF sooner than they think. That would finish off Gordon's premiership.
127

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 10:13:46
197 UG it's not a red herring, cmon UG if a rival bid was put forward who would lose the most political capital from another bid?

So why was the information leaked who had most to gain from the information being in the public domain?

All answers point to Gordon Brown and treasury.

The market that when RBS and Barclays bid for Amro is completely different, the M&A market and normal conditions don't exists at the moment.

Any prospective bidder would have to go through the treasury as the Government is the largest stakeholder in the bank.
128

TheDisplacedGlaswegian,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 10:15:03
I have no confidence in the Westminster Government's handling of this at all. It looks like they are out to scupper Scotland and reduce Edinburgh's standing as one of Europes leading financial centres in a crazy and ill thought out attempt to stave off Scottish independence.
Given that the deal was formulated before the Government launched a financial recovery package that both HBOS and Lloyds needed, I remain thoroughly unconvinced that this takeover has to go through.

(To the regular posters, hello. I'm a refugee from the herald...)
129

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 10:21:43
203 Tomrod
But what was the point of keeping the identity of another potential bidder secret. If a bidder is serious then its identity will be revealed at some stage anyway.

Your analysis does not make sense. If Gordon Brown is stating that the Lloyds offer is the only option why on Earth would he encourage a leak that states there is another potential option. That would be absolutely crazy. He would be deliberately undermining his own position.
130

G,

dundy 12/11/2008 10:22:04
What a pro-SNP story by the Scotsman!!!I'm surprised that any of the moaning-faced SNPites have recovered enough to post!!!

The spin is quite obvious....the gov have scuppered a deal with the Chinese so that the merger will go ahead...However it is equally likely that the Chinese offer (which no one knows the details) was not acceptable on many levels...the most obvious of these being that UK gov money pledged to HBOS would flow in to the Chinese bank rather than the merged "UK" bank....However, to some any deal other than the Lloyds deal is better no matter the details or the effects on Scotland and the UK....
131

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 10:22:28
200 UG Normal market M&A does not exist as I have written any bidder will have to go through the treasury, the smoke screen about best shareholder is bunk as the UK government is the largest stakeholder it's was in the best interest of the tax payer.

So I would argue large scale job losses and loss of competition over the medium to long term is not in the nations best interests.
132

Ugly George,

edinburgh 12/11/2008 10:23:24
205 Deep thought
"I witnessed electoral fraud whilst on polling station duty at Glenrothes"

I take it then that you will be reporting this to the police.
133

Hamish Scott,

12/11/2008 10:23:50
Those who wish to rubbish the concerns that the Lloyd's takeover is politically manipulated seem to ignore the fact that concerns are being raised not just by nats but by unionists as well, such as the Scotsman and the Liberal Democrats.
134

Shave,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 10:27:10
#205
Electoral fraud? Really? Are there any people not in this big conspiracy that you could report this to? The Electoral Commission perhaps?

Strange we haven't heard anything from them.
135

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 10:28:25
206 UG the leak would be strengthen his position, any initial enquiry of an alternative bid is always sensitive. Again why was this leaked if the government are honest about being open it doesn't make sense does it!

Because it would create competition between the two bidders and this would give us a choice and that choice might not be Lloyds and again GB would lose face over this, because he painted himself as the big saviour on his white charger.
136

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 10:29:56
208 Tomrod
The govt's stake in HBOS is in the form of non-voting preference shares so the outcome is still in the hands of the ordinary shareholders. So any other bid can be put to them.

Also there would be nothing to prevent another bank putting an offer to HBOS shareholders that is conditional on the same recapitalisation of HBOS as exists with the takeover from LLoyds TSB. As Alastair Darling is on record as saying that "all bids will be treated equally" the govt could not withdraw the recapitalisation.
137

Publius,

London 12/11/2008 10:31:44
#205 Deep Thought

The Labour majority at Glenrothes was nearly 7000. Are you seriously suggesting that there were 7000 fraudulent votes in Glenrothes? ... Or are you a conspiracist or fantasist or something?
138

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 10:33:47
Putting all the smoke and mirrors to the side, it is perfectly obvious that the UK Treasury are actively hostile to a HBoS merger with anyone other than LLoyds.

We are entitled to ask why.

139

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 10:33:49
213 Deep thought
So you are saying that the police are complicit in electoral fraud and that you have witnessed this. In that case why do you not report it to the Independent police Complaints Commission.
140

Publius,

12/11/2008 10:36:49
#195 Tormod

You write "It will be very difficult for an alternative bid to be put forward because it will be leaked at the initial stage"

Quite right too. Shareholders, depositors and employees have a right to know. I have savings in Halifax and the Bank of Scotland. I want to know who is bidding for HBOS.
141

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 10:39:42
214 UG The government will have a big say on the outcome come on do you honestly believe that the board of hbos are not in communication with the treasuy?.

Again if Alistair Darling is honest and serious about accepting other bids why was the apporach from BOC leaked? Surely this information would have been kept confidential as it would have given a second option and would force Lloyds to change there bid.

What the treasury / AD /GB and of course Jim Murphy are saying in public are not being borne out by the facts of the leaks to the press and especially Robert Preston et al.
142

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 10:41:19
219 Yes you should know, the problem is that before a bid can be put on the table the leaks to the press are stopping this from happening.

Therefore as a shareholder you do not have a second option to judge on.
143

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 10:43:28
217 Observer
If the situation is as you say it is it may be that the treasury is looking for the least costly outcome. They are already forking out £37bn and may feel that they do not wnat to fork out more if they can avoid it. Hardly an unreasonable position if it is the case.
144

Publius,

London 12/11/2008 10:44:03
#188 Marian

Your post is the most sensible this morning. The UK cannot spend its way out of recession through tax cuts funded by more government borrowing because:
(1) The government has borrowed far too much money already (a lot doesn't show because it is off-balance sheet);
(2) further borrowing will depress the value of sterling still further raising the cost of imports and bringing a return to inflation;
(3) tax cuts will be spent on imports and so will do little to create employment in the UK.
145

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 10:47:15
221 Tomrod
"the problem is that before a bid can be put on the table the leaks to the press are stopping this from happening."

You keep making this assertion but you do not offer any reason as to how or why it should be the case. There is no reason why the identity being known prevents a bid being put in place. Also, as I have said, such a leak does more to undermine Gordon brown's position as it gives the impression of another option apart from Lloyds TSB so where is the logic in your argument.
146

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 10:47:37
222 UG a reasonable argument however a couple of things if the deal goes through and there is 10,000 - 20,000 job losses and the loss of income in Scotland especially how much will the social and financial cost be?

And we will never know what BOC were discussing because of the bloody leaks!
147

Marian,

12/11/2008 10:48:26
After 11 years in power at Westminster Gordon Brown and his New Labour media stooges spin and spin but will not answer the following questions:-

Why are New Labour alienating English Voters by telling them that Scotland is an economic basket case dependent on alms from England?

If Scotland is the economic basket case that New Labour claim it is then why did New Labour allow it to remain so during their years in power?

Why is it that Scotland's economic performance in terms of its GDP (Gross Domestic Product ) after 50 years of Labour rule is utterly miserable compared to other small northern countries:
GDP per capita in US dollars:-
Scotland $23,666.
UK $26,150
Norway - £36,600)
Denmark - $30,940
Ireland - $36,360
(figures from http://globalis.gvu.unu.edu and http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2003/03/17471/22721)

Why is it that the countries with the highest quality of life (see The Economist rankings), are: Ireland, Switzerland, Norway, Luxembourg, Sweden, Australia, Italy, Denmark, Spain, Singapore, Finland, United States, Canada, New Zealand, Netherlands………. and the UK is way back at 29th?
148

Nevsky,

Moscow 12/11/2008 10:49:37
224 Ugly George:

Read the headline:

'Bank of China walks away from HBOS deal 'after Treasury cold shoulder'

Quite clear isn't it? At least it's clear to everyone apart from you..mmm...wonder why that is?

Damage limitation for your beloved union George?
149

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 10:52:30
222 Ugly George:

''hardly an unreasonable position if that is the case''.

We don't know if that is the case. What we do know is that the OFT have warned that this merger will have a negative impact on Scottish small and medium sized businesses, and that competition rules have been overturned, and that the UK Treasury are actively hostile to any other bid.

There is also evidence that the Treasury were involved in discussions to overturn competition rules to allow this merger two years ago.

I smell a rat.


150

Anne, Glasgow,

12/11/2008 10:54:45
I hope Brown's ulterior motive about Lloyds TSB comes to the surface and is truthfully presented to the people of Scotland. I despise the man and his mouthpiece in Scotland, Jim Murphy. Am I the only person who cannot stand Murphy. He sounds like a man on drugs. Even Glen Campbell gets impatient interviewing the man. After Murphy's endless monologue on the Politics Show and Campbell had recovered his marbles, on came a realy human being, Alex Salmond.
151

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 10:56:11
227 Nevski
I did read the headline and noticed that the comment is in quotation marks. You are assuming that the reporting is accurate. The article said that this comment came from "sources close to the deal". I wonder who they are but you evidently feel that whatever they say is gospel. Do you always have such blind faith in anonymous sources.

Therefore it is not as you stated "quite clear"
152

Ugly George,

edinburgh 12/11/2008 10:59:42
230 nevski
PS
You should also note that the Scotsman's reporting of this whole issue has not been of the highest journalistic standards. Last week, it had to publish a retraction or as it preferred to say, "clarification" of comments it made about LLoyds TSB CEO Eric Daniels.
153

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 11:04:46
224 UG the logic is there for all to see as in what has just happend with Jim Spowart and the BOC?

UG these type of bids especially in the current climate are extremely sensitive I was involved a few M&A deals at a low level mind many years ago. These deals are incredible sensitive especially at the initial approach.

If the initial approach is positive the next stage is started and so on a deal like this takes 6 months usually. I spoke to a colleague with M&A experience and he told me Lloyds must have a deal and team in place ready to go for this to happen so quickly.

quote "as I have said, such a leak does more to undermine Gordon brown's position as it gives the impression of another option apart from Lloyds TSB so where is the logic in your argument."

You have just proven my logic of course it undermines his position as the saviour and deal maker, again why do you think this information was leaked?
154

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 11:13:18
232 Tomrod
Is the situation you described not that pertaining to an intial bid in terms of M&A as any indication of such a bid is market sensitive?

But surely the position is vastly different once a bid has been made. The situation with the RBS takeover of ABN Amro illustrates this. ABN Amro were going to recommend the bid from Barclays until RBS stepped in with a better offer. Barclays then refused to up their offer leaving RBS with the scalp.

Also I did not follow the meaning of the last point. You seem to be accepting that any leak of a potential take-over would undermine Gordon Brown's position so who is responsible for such a leak if one occurred.
155

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 11:23:49
233 UG The leak came from the government, what did the leak do?

It stopped any other bid in it's tracks, because any other bid would be politically bad for Brown as he has staked a lot of face by this deal.

The initial enquiry from Jim Spowart and BOC was leaked, this has stopped it in it's tracks.

UG this isn't about finance it's politics it's about the reputation of Gordon Brown.

Any initial bid is always market sensitive even in normal times as speculation can as we all know affect share prices.

The fact that the HMG is the largest stakeholder means that the normal approach and enquiry mechanisms are completely different.

This deal is about politics not finance and as such normal M&A procedures are being ignored by HMG because of the politics.
156

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 11:26:05
As an indicator of the change in the M&A market deals are down about 50%
157

Memyself&I,

12/11/2008 11:32:25
Jock McSprog @ 8 comes pretty close to the truth with his remarks. Except for the football where even I like to see England being beaten ;p

This site is no more than a forum for SNP cyber terrorists to vent their frustration because nobody else will listen to them. There must be no more that 50 people who actually post their thoughts nowadays, and 90% of them are SNP activists. It is becoming a waste of time posting.
Edward, you are mad as a hatter and have no real grasp of what is going on with this deal. You pretend you do, but you don't. You skim through the headlines and little else.

This is embarressing. The simple truth is, nobody else wants HBOS at this moment. The Chinese Government (lets stop calling it a bank) don't even want it - would you really want HBOS run by a Chinese Governemnt arm that is a decade behind banking in the western world?
Spowart, Goodwin and Mattie - I still want to know why they have such an interest. What have they got to lose? What holdings do they currently have in HBOS & RBS? This is all motivated by the greed and ego's of these idiots. They are creating hope where none exists. Fair enough, explore the different options. Put out feelers and see if they can generate interest from elsewhere. But not this. That goes for Tavish Scott & Salmond too.

What is interesting is that none of you appear to be employees or shareholders in any of the businesses affected. If you were an employee of HBOS you'd be pretty relieved that you have a job right now. If you were confident of keeping your job you'd be extremely happy that your personal shares are still worth at least something and that you have a savy, risk averse and solid bank such as Lloyds riding to the rescue. And lets be clear, the only reason HBOS exists right now is because the Lloyds bid is on the table.
The fact that the union Unite have looked at the deal and agreed it is the best option despite job losses being inevitable speaks volumes. Sometimes you have to bite
158

nostress,

grangemouth 12/11/2008 11:35:58
It's a sad day when I actually believe that the Chinese rather than the Treasury in London would be more inclined to look after Scotland's interests.
159

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 11:39:41
234 Tomrod

"It stopped any other bid in it's tracks, because any other bid would be politically bad for Brown as he has staked a lot of face by this deal."

This is the part of your analysis that doesn't stack up. If the BoC were serious about putting in a bid they would know the circustances and know that the bid could be bad for Gordon Brown's position. They would also know that they would have to reveal their identity at some stage so why would a leak stop them. I they were/are serious all they have to do is issue a statement confirming that they are considering a bid.

There had been talk of a bid already which had an effect on the share price so, as far as the market sensitive nature aspect is concerned, such a statement would have clarified the situation. Companies that are engaged in M&A situations often issue statements confirming that they are doing so thus avoiding unnecessary speculation.
160

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 11:41:48
236 I do have a stake in HBOS as they are a major client of my employer and I have a part of my pension invested with them so enough of the insidious cyber nat language it's insulting and childish.

No other deal is on the table, simply because at the moment the BOC approach has been leaked to the press again why was this done if HMG are honest that all approaches will be heard and investigated why the leaking of the info it doesn't make financial sense does it! But it does make political sense!
161

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 11:43:19
237 nostress
"It's a sad day when I actually believe that the Chinese rather than the Treasury in London would be more inclined to look after Scotland's interests."

If the Bank of China were interested then they would be doing so as a good deal for themselves. It would not be a matter of looking after Scotland's interests.
162

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 11:51:17
234 Tomrod
PS
There is another part of your analysis that does not stack up. According to "sources close to the deal" the BoC decided not to proceed as they got a "cold shoulder" from the Treasury. If this is the case then the deal was a non starter so why would the govt then leak that there had been a potential bidder. If the deal was dead then there was no reason to scupper it by leaking it and all that has been done by the govt is issue a leak whiches damages its own position. This does not make sense.
163

KarenL,

12/11/2008 11:55:19
The Government is not yet a stakeholder in either bank and they will only become so after the proposed takeover and equity placements. Both banks are still in private ownership. A prospective bidder would initially go to the Takeover Pannel to indicate their intentions to make an offer.
164

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 11:58:02
241 Hen Broon
I do not think it would be advisable to play that card. Your knowledge of the history is fragmented.

In the mid C19th the british fought the "Opium Wars" with China to protect the opium trading of Jardine and Matheson. The result of the wars was the acquistion of Hong Kong as a British terriory and the maintenace of opium trading which allowed Jardine and Matheson to make a fortune.

This was a painful aspect of Chinese history for them and if you think that you can get a good deal for Scotland by referring to this you are really deluded. It would be like Germany trying to get a good deal from Poland by reminding them that they invaded them in 1939.
165

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 11:59:33
238 UG but you have written that government has publicly said that all deals are welcome, so why would they think that a second option was bad for Gordon Brown?

If GB and AD had publicly stated otherwise, it doesn't make sense don't you think?

Yes they would have to identify themselves after the initial stage of approach and then a proposal could be sent to the treasury, however what has happened at the initial approach?

This I believe would be the BOC's first approach to become a major investor in Europe, I would think that the internal forces within the BOC would be very sensitive to any deal because it would be first of it's kind for them.

On the M&A market notification, we are not working in the normal market conditions, this approach is not BOC to HBOS it's BOC to the treasury.

166

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 12:01:20
Now that Gordon Brown has scuppered any chance of a white knight takeover by the Bank of China, he only thing people in Scotland can do now, well Bank of Scotland customers at least, is to take their business elsewhere if the Lloyds takeover goes ahead.

Nevertheless there is still the matter of HBOS shareholders who may still have the collective wisdom to pull the rug out from under the Lloyds takeover. HBOS shares are very much devalued at present and the shareholders are not going to get a good price from Lloyds. With strong managment HBOS can still operate as an independent institution and become a solid bank again in a few years time.
167

Finlang,

Switzerland 12/11/2008 12:04:35
#229 Anne, Glasgow

I doubt that "Brown's ulterior motive about Lloyds TSB ... [will be] truthfully presented to the people of Scotland." More's the pity, but not unexpected.

Like many other Scots folks I had early hopes for Brown on becoming PM. Oh how we were deceived by this most mealy-mouthed monster, post-Blair. Brown has no shame in his disdainful treatment of the land that spawned him. (The elocution lessons serve only to make him sound a bigger fool.) I too "despise the man and his mouthpiece in Scotland, Jim Murphy." That man is creepily robotic in his trotting out the party line. This Labour administration is corrupt throughout and needs to be extinguished before it can do more serious damage.

The HBOS/Lloyds TSB fiasco could be Brown's crowning slap in the chops to Scotland as supreme leader in Westminster. The Bank of China interest should have been encouraged for every sensible reason. Brown's megalomania is frightening.
168

Publius,

London 12/11/2008 12:05:41
I can't see why the government wouldn't welcome an approach from the Bank of China. The government might not like a takeoever but a major investment (say up to 49 percent) would be very useful because:
(1) capital inflow from a country with which the UK has a trade imbalance;
(2) China would want the bank, the Scotland and the UK as a whole to succeed to make its investment profitable;
(3) it would make Scotland and the UK as a whole the Chinese banking base in Europe thus generating jobs and other economic activity.

All in all the UK government has no interest in falling out with the Bank of China or the Chinese government.

169

KarenL,

12/11/2008 12:07:03
#241 The Bank of China has reaffirmed its committment to work with RBS, despite the financial crisis. The Chinese are no fools,and are adept at undermining and outwitting the British Government (the takeover of Hong Kong is an example). Gordon Brown and Mandelson and the other Labour clowns are not smart enough or resilient enough to deal with them. If the Chinese want to get HBOS, slowly and surely they will get it.

They may wait until after the LLoyds shareholders meeting. If the takeover is approved, they could then snap up both banks. After all the Government has sanctioned the mega bank on grounds of financial stability and the Bank of China has more cash in its vaults than LLoyds TSB and the Government combined. What an idiot is Gordon Brown!!
170

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 12:07:42
# 215

Can you sugest a reason why there were 7,000 postal ballots? Given it was a by election with no impact on legislative voting strength and a reduced overall turnout. Nevertheless postal voting was up ten fold. Labour had been suspected of postal ballot fraud in constituencies in the North of Eng;and in 2005.
171

vimto,

12/11/2008 12:07:46
Oh dear,scottish jobs must be saved at all costs and to hell with English jobs1!
172

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 12:08:43
242 UG You are right it doesn't make sense to leak a dead deal does it! Unless of course the initial enquiry was a serious one and it threatened GB's position. There is no other logical explanation.

On the grounds of finance it would be better to have two bidders for HBOS would it not? So why would HMG discourage another potential bidder it doesn't make financial sense!

All the actions of HMG is about protecting the original deal mastered by one Gordon Brown, every action / decision taken by the government does not make financial sense it's nuts, the HBOS deal is simply about politics not finance.
173

vimto,

12/11/2008 12:11:37
249. They can go to hell,as a Hbos shareholder i do not want foreign prats running my bank.
174

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 12:11:47
Iain Glasgow
"Nevertheless there is still the matter of HBOS shareholders who may still have the collective wisdom to pull the rug out from under the Lloyds takeover. HBOS shares are very much devalued at present and the shareholders are not going to get a good price from Lloyds."

Why do you presume that your knowledge of the state of HBOS is superior to that of the markets.
175

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 12:13:44
# 215

The Lloyds takeover will be at the cost of just as many jobs in England as in Scotland. Bad as this deal is for Edinburgh's financial services it is equally bad for Yorkshire which has already suffered the eradication of Bradford and Bingley. The Lloyds take over has no benefit for Scotland or even for the UK. The only beneficiaries will be Lloyds TSB and (in his own deluded mind at least) Gordon Brown's reputation. For this reason David Cameron and Nick Clegg need to come out and back alternative bids for HBOS as well.
176

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 12:13:54
248 Publius I agree it doesn't make a single iota of financial sense to discourage BOC investment does it?

So why isn't HMG encouraging a bid from them instead of what has happend.

Who is at the centre of this deal one Gordon Brown esq and what do we know about his personality and behaviour so far as chancellor and PM.

He will do whatever he can to try and make himself look important and the saviour and nothing will get in the way of that narrative.
177

Publius,

London 12/11/2008 12:14:24
#250 IainGlasgow

My guess is that most of the postal votes would have been drummed up by the SNP. The SNP party machine prides itself on its slickness at canvassing, organising postal votes, getting to the polling station etc. Without postal votes Labour would have an even bigger majority.
178

sonofhamish,

edinburgh 12/11/2008 12:16:17
This is all nonsense, HBOS will still be British bank. Yes there will probably be some layoffs but ultimately less than what they might be otherwise.

Also the Times article on Sunday that shows Lloyds have secretly loaned £10billion to HBOS shows how dire things had become and THAT is probably the main issue putting other bids off.
179

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 12:16:31
# 254

I don't but I am sure HBOS shareholders understand well enough how many jobs will go, what the impact of reduced competition in the banking sector will be and how much of a bargain Lloyds are getting in the deal.

Both banks have had to be bailed out by the Treasury. I would say even as a l ay person that both banks need a structual overhaul before any takeovers or mergers are even considered.
180

Publius,

London 12/11/2008 12:17:18
#256 Tormod

You ask why the government doesn't encourage a bid from the Bank of China. The most likely answer is that there never was a serious approach from the Bank of China. The whole story is arong.
181

Publius,

London 12/11/2008 12:20:27
#254 Ugly George

You're right. There's more chance of LloydsTSB shareholders pulling out of the deal.
182

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 12:20:53
252 Tomrod
There appears to be no logical explanation for leaking a dead deal. Your suggestion that this could be the case if the bid was serious still does not stack up as, if the deal was dead, whether it was serious or not is irrelevant.

Many of your comments involve taking the comments in the article by "sources" at face value. Is there not another possibility - that BoC did look at the possibility and decided that it was not in their interests and that these "sources" (remaining anonymous for some reason) are trying to justify their previuos stance.
183

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 12:22:55
261 publius
Indeed. Virtually all the commentary I have read in the financial media has come to the same conclusion.
184

KarenL,

London 12/11/2008 12:22:56
#244 Ugly George - your historical knowledge is even more fragmented. The Scots and Chinese ran the fabulously wealthy and well organised island of Hong Kong for many years. Scots and Chinese (and Jews) share many characteristics which the Chinese recognise and respect.

UK diplomats are not taken very seriously by the Chinese as they have no military or economic power to antagonise China. China regards the UK as a busted flush. The Chinese are inscrutable and slowly and quietly pursue their own agenda.


185

nostress,

grangemouth 12/11/2008 12:23:09
vimto: They can go to hell,as a Hbos shareholder i do not want foreign prats running my bank.

Ah, the voice of reason...thing is in Scotland, we obviously don't mind "foreign prats" running things - after all they have been for 300 years.
186

vimto,

12/11/2008 12:23:49
254. I can guarantee that will not happen.
187

vimto,

12/11/2008 12:24:55
265. And will continue to do so for another 300 years!
188

vimto,

12/11/2008 12:26:44
265. Oh, and in case you haven't noticed your passport is the same as mine,t-at!
189

vimto,

12/11/2008 12:35:09
264. WRONG! English businessmen ran Hong-Kong,and to a certain extent still do.
190

Arfur,

12/11/2008 12:36:31
Brown and Darling will stop at nothing to trash the Scottish econemy and yet still there are idiots like those in Glenrothes who will put up with it. Wake up and smell the coffee.
191

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 12:37:45
261 & 263 Folks we have to ask ourselves who leaked this information and who has most to gain or lose from this information being in the public domain? The answers point the finger at one man Gordon Brown.

Question if the BOC did get a bid on the table and this was accepted by the shareholders would GB have the most to lose yes or no?

I am following the decisions that have happened and the logical conclusion of those decisions not the sources. Talking about sources were is Robert Preston getting all this information from?
192

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 12:42:57
# 265

Well British prats haven't been doing a good job of running it which is why it's in a mess and your shares have been devalued.

The Bank of China presented a much needed opportunity for inward investment (not a loan but investment) in these difficult economic times.

What is happening is the UK Government borrowing money to bail out Lloyds TSB so it can buy HBOS which also needs bailed out. This money will eventually have to be paid back. What's to say as the recession deepens, Lloyds and its acquisitions won't need bailed out further. The pilars of the banking system in the UK are rotten and crumbling. This merger may create a mega bank but it won't necessarily be stronger and better.

Inward investment by an overseas bank would avert massive job losses (people whom the government would then have to pay benefits to). As Prime Minister Gordoon Brown should be concerned first and foremost with protecting as many jobs as possible. Yes the Lloyds takeover may protect many jobs by preventing HBOS collapsing but a takeover by an investor without conflicting interests in UK banking at present would save more. Even nationalisation would be a better option that the Lloyds takeover.
193

vimto,

12/11/2008 12:44:24
207. Sorry! think you'll find Salmond is doing quit well on his own!
194

KarenL,

12/11/2008 12:45:06
#271 - the BOC can get a bid on the table by going to the Takeover Panel. That is the first port of call. The Government can then make their comments. HBOS and LLoyds TSB are still privately owned and ultimately it is the shareholders who make the decision. BOC have not been to the Takeover Panel.

195

nostress,

grangemouth 12/11/2008 12:46:54
vimto; "Oh, and in case you haven't noticed your passport is the same as mine,t-at!"

You're German too? Ach wie schoen, wir sollen uns mal treffen.
196

KarenL,

12/11/2008 12:47:02
#209

The Government guarantee has already prevented HBOS collapsing and on that basis, BOS has raised several billion in bonds which were very well received. The mega bank may be the new AIG.
197

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 12:51:24
202
What do you mean 'foreign prats'?
198

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 12:53:11
What's happened to the bloody thread the numbering has gone cuckoo??

KarenL the government are in the loop, otherwise why are the treasury briefing journalists about BOC, if this was a straightforward deal between Lloyds and HBOS I would agree but it isn't it has a large boot print of number 10 all over it.

199

nostress,

grangemouth 12/11/2008 12:53:23
Grahamski: What do you mean 'foreign prats'?

Dunno, you'd need to ask your unionist pal vimto. seems to think he's German, claims he has the same passport as me.
200

Ugly George,

12/11/2008 12:54:03
201 Karen L
I lived in Hong Kong for a short time several years ago so I am aware of its prosperity and how it came about but you are not dealing with the point I made. Hong Kong has a population of a few million. China has a population of over 1 billion. So for the vast majority of Chinese the prosperity of Hong Kong when it was a British colony was totally irrelevant. However the opium wars which resulted in Jardine and mattheson making their fortunes in Hong Kong meant the forceful annexation of part of China as a British colony. This is why mention of the setting up of Hong kong is poor salesmanship if you want curry favour with the Chinese.
201

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 12:55:56
218
Nostress,
You said: 'thing is in Scotland, we obviously don't mind "foreign prats" running things - after all they have been for 300 years.'
What do you mean by that?
202

nostress,

grangemouth 12/11/2008 12:57:47
Grahamski, I think it's pretty clear what I mean by that - even a died-in-the-wool unionist like yourself should be able to work it out. Gell?
203

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 13:01:05
220,
I have absolutely no idea what you mean by claiming that the Scots have been run by 'foreign prats' for 300 years. Is this a David Icke moment for you? Are you going to suggest that there is a secret fifth column of foreigners ruling over us? Perhaps giant lizards?
204

vimto,

12/11/2008 13:05:11
217. Half German actually,my grandmother came from Frankfurt!
205

nostress,

grangemouth 12/11/2008 13:05:26
Grahamski, I wish I had some of what you're on - sounds wicked. I suggest you have wee lie down.
206

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 13:05:35
Grahamski do you think that the government has intervened in a potential BOC bid to protect Gordon Brown?
207

nostress,

grangemouth 12/11/2008 13:09:49
vimto; Na toll! Am Main oder An Der Oder? die Oma meine ich natürlich.
208

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 13:13:32
226
Absolutely not. Why would they have to 'protect' Gordon Brown from a BOC bid? How would a BOC bid harm anybody? It doesn't threaten either the government or Mr Brown if another bidder comes in. The less we are exposed as a nation the better. There is no conspiracy here. Just a lot of ill-informed speculation and conspiracy theories.
The simple fact of the matter is that no serious alternative bid has materialised. There has been lots of hot air and no funding. It is crucial at this stage to behave with responsibility, something that many have singularly failed to do.
The trades union involved Unite has looked at this proposals and even they confirm that the LLoyds deal is the ONLY deal available.
209

nostress,

grangemouth 12/11/2008 13:16:20
Thanks Grahamski, you've put my mind at ease. You're obviously a man what knows everything - close to the centre of power and all that. Did the giant lizards tell you?
210

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 13:18:17
# 214

AIG is still on life support by the Federal Government. The fact that a Republican President took the step of nationalising AIG shows what dire straits it was in. Maybe I'm picking you up wrong but its not a good template for what we should aspire to for the Bank of Scotland.
211

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 13:21:14
230
Glad to see that you have at least the good grace to be embarrassed by your looney tunes outburst.....let's have no more nonsense about 'foreign prats' ruling us, eh?
212

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 13:24:16
# 227

As people become more confident in Scotland as a nation (and its economic performance) they become more inclined to vote SNP and probably are more likely to vote yes in an independence referendum. Damage to the Scottish economy more profound than the UK economy as a whole will undermine that. Gordon Brown said he would do whatever it takes to preserve the union. Gordon Brown also wan't to centralise core financial power in London even at the expense of Edinburgh's financial services.
213

nostress,

grangemouth 12/11/2008 13:26:37
Grahamski, much as like to linger must go now...only so much pleasure to be extracted messing with the single-celled lifeform that is the unionist mindset. Got ma kilt and claymore to sort out and paint my bahoukie blue for you. Toodle pip old bean!
214

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/11/2008 13:26:46
Lies, damned lies and potty schemes to buy HBOS.

Who seriously thought that the BoC deal would even reach the bid stage?

If ever there was a case of a clutching at straws - this was it.

I doubt very much that civil servants gave the cold shoulder. If it was the case then why does the anonymous insider not make public their accusation?

But I doubt that will happen.

The priority as far as I am concerned is to make sure that the merger (assuming shareholders vote for it) results in as few job losses as possible. That seems to be the position of the First Minister too - although he does appear to haver allowed Alex Neil free range to attack from another direction.
215

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 13:30:55
sm753 This deal has everything to do with politics, GB has also said many things about this deal as well as the nice wee quote you listed.

If the government were really interested in another bidder being involved why was the information leaked?

Why the treasury comments of a dead deal / no good etc

The reasons are very simple every decision taken by the government about the involvement of BOC flies in the face of every financial rule about M&A's and best value.

Please note that in any of my comments I did not refer to a secret agenda / conspiracy / HQ in Edinburgh. But you have I wonder why are you trying to move the argument away from the decisions taken by HMG to something else?

All my comments talk about the logical conclusion of the decisions of HMG, what they have said is not what has happened.

Gordon Brown has staked a huge amount of political capital for this deal to go through, he has the most to loose if it doesn't.

So again ask yourself does the leak of the BOC interest make it easier or harder for any bidder to put an alternative forward.
216

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 13:32:26
234
I'll look out for you in Asda Grangemouth...you shouldn't be too difficult to spot.
217

Ugly George,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 13:33:53
227 sm753
The problem is that, no matter what happens, some people will be determined to view it as some anti-scottish conspiracy. This tends to reveal more about their particular obsessions than it does about the reality of the situation. One would wonder what an observer from overseas would make of this. He/she would notice that of the £37bn of taxpayers money which is being used to bail-out banks, £31bn is going to the two banks which have HQ in Scotland.

That observer would then notice claims from various sources that this is all some conspiracy to ruin the Scottish economy. At this stage that person would have to wonder what on Earth is going on.
218

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 13:35:06
Fed the problem is not the interest from BOC, the problem is that the way the government has handled the situation, we'll never know will we.

The way the government has leaked the information and briefed the fella Robert Preston leaves no doubt on there intentions.

The treasury probably saw the BOC as having a low chance of success so why the briefing against it?
219

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 13:37:22
236
'Gordon Brown has staked a huge amount of political capital for this deal to go through, he has the most to loose if it doesn't.'
No he hasn't. Mr Brown has staked a huge amount of political capital on saving the banking sector, which he has done by re-capitalising it.
220

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 13:39:13
238 Jesus Christ I am talking to a wall, I am saying this deal is all about the reputation of Gordon Brown.

Why the leaking? Why if the bid was rubbish then it would have played out as rubbish wouldn't it. HMG could have let the bid die at the first hurdle naturally but they cannot stop themselves from spinning and being control freaks of the agenda.
221

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 13:48:19
240 Oh yes he has, so the economic problems have nothing to do with "Mr Brown" and his fiscal and monetary policies Grahamski?

Funny you know what happens when a commodity is used to fuel an economy on the pretence that commodity will be available at a constant rate of supply and that the proceeds of that commodity being used as colaterial to purchase more of the commodity and this being used as a measure to grow the economy Grahamksi?
222

Sumlogic,

Tyical 12/11/2008 13:49:44
Once again it seems as though the Westminster crooks are showing their hand. They want Lloyds / HBOS deal as it seems a stitch up from start to finish, weighted heavily in favour of Lloyds and also serves the Unionist aim of helping further hobble Scotland’s chances for Independence.

They have already borrowed heavily to prop up their failing economy (YES, THEY HAVE BEEN STEERING THE ECONOMY FOR THE LAST DECADE), no doubt backed up in some part using North Sea oil as some sort of collateral.

The sad part seems for me anyway that once again in spite of all that has happened and will happen in the not too distant future, FOLK still think LABOUR of old = LABORE of New and don’t see the wood for the trees.

Once again Scotland will be sold short, not by the crooks South of the Border but by its own ignorant, frightened population!

Waken up people!
223

,

12/11/2008 13:50:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
224

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 13:51:27
244,
How is that relevant to who takes over HBOS?
225

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/11/2008 13:56:11
"The treasury probably saw the BOC as having a low chance of success so why the briefing against it?"

There has not been any briefing against it - only the company's name came out and not necessarily from a Treasury source.

In any case that information would have becomke public knowledge had the bid been anyhwere close to being lodged. As Robert Peston points out:

"if Spowart and Bank of China were anywhere close to making a formal offer, they would by now have been forced to make a statement to that effect by the Takeover Panel, under the code that governs these things.

So we can safely assume that Bank of China is not poised to swoop, that preparations are at a pretty early stage."

The truth is that for HBOS shareholders their options for the future are limited. Again from Peston:

"Which means, for now, that HBOS shareholders have a choice of the bird-in-hand, Lloyds - which may not be as plump as they may like - and that nebulous thing in the bush spotted by the duo of banking knights who want HBOS to remain independent."



226

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 14:00:16
242 unless you haven't been keeping up to date one GB has been brokering the deal between Lloyds and HBOS.

quote "The government are not committed to LTSB to the exclusion of others. It is (still) the only option on the table. They have done what they can to facilitate it, because if no-one else shows up the only options are bankruptcy / nationalisation. They have said repeatedly they are open to other offers. What is the problem?"

So why the leaking from the government as this makes no financial sense?

It wasn't Mr Spowart that leaked the information he has most to loose. Bumbling is an interesting word to describe him why did you use it?

So does Robert Preston have a data stream from HMG?

Jim spowart I believe was referring to one Jim Murhpy and his release of information into the public domain as unhelpful.

It's not about conscpiracy it's about the mismanagement of the UK economy by Gordon Brown and the decision he is taking.
227

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 14:04:51
247 that is how Gordon Brown fuelled the UK economy Grahamski on the pretence the commodity of easy credit would be constantly available to finance his boom, this decision has led us to this point in the business cycle, in another words bust, no more cheap credit no more economic growth.
228

Daibhidh,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 14:05:59
So London labour are right royually shafting Scotland and the bloody idiots in Glenrothes voted them back in...what a bunch of utter tw@ts those in Glenrothes, indeed all Labour voters, are...the Labour Party exists ONLY to destroy Scottish interests...and by God they're suceeding while Scotland sleep walks into economic destruction under the Labour Party...
229

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 14:06:34
248 Labour have used the failure of HBOS and RBS to use the old too wee too poor slogan against any type of fiscal autonomy.
230

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/11/2008 14:12:07
#250 If the bid was anywhere near being submitted it would have had to be made public under Rule 9 of the Takeover Panel Code.

231

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 14:12:12
249 Fed come on who did Robert Preston get his info from?

I am not disputing the fact that the BOC interest would have become public knowledge that fact is that at the crucial initial stage this information came into the public domain.

BOC and Jim spowart had nothing to gain from this, if they wanted to back off they could have done with any fanfare.

The leaking is all about trying to control the agenda and the situation by HMG they cannot help themselves they are drunk on it.
232

Grahamski,

Falkirk 12/11/2008 14:15:49
252
Posts like this forced the Herald to clamp down and pre-moderate their posts. Let's hope the lunatic fringe of nationalism doesn't spoil these boards for us all.
233

Rufus T. Firefly,

12/11/2008 14:17:03
73 TWC,Ayrshire 12/11/2008 07:53:06
Grahamski. Rufus,

"I don't know what side you are on here".

TWC none of the above posts are from me, note the missing dot after the 'T'.
234

Rufus T. Firefly,

12/11/2008 14:19:01
70 Nevsky,Moscow 12/11/2008 07:51:26
130 Rufus#

"A sweet. Rufus has another little unionist friend to play with and will creep and crawl to him like he usually does."

Nevsky, none of the posts were from me.
235

W U Merchant,

Aberdeen 12/11/2008 14:21:46
Another pie in the sky nationalist idea hits the skids. Scotland deserves better.
236

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 14:25:44
254 google hbos leak, don't tell me you are still naive in believing that HMG does not lie?

He has his reputation in working in the financial sector, May I point out it was not Jim Spowart that had his hands on the financial controls of the UK, Gordon Brown decided to use the commodity of easy credit back by mortgage securities to fuel the economy.

255 Fed indeed BOC / JS had nothing to gain from this leak. So why would they leak it? I wrote earlier that my understanding is this type of deal takes 6 months or so.
237

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 14:29:57
# 242

Maybe Bank of China was a decoy to keep attention away from a real bidder until they are ready to submit their bid.
238

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 14:31:07
257 I would have used the word independence but I knew that would send you into a spasm.

259 & 263 aye lads keep up the good work of misdirection
239

steve52,

Kinfauns 12/11/2008 14:38:50
One must remember that Gordon has been described as a control freak by some of his inner circle. The HBOS saga has certainly given him another excuse to stick it right up those rebellious Scots who dared to chuck out Labour. Simply put we Scots are being taught a lesson and shown that we must do what Westminster says.

Now that Jock Mc has gone perhaps some sense can be had. His comment that the a union leader has backed the takeover only shows how naive he is. It will be Sir union leader shortly no doubt.

If these unionists think the UK Government has not ben undermining a bid by the Bank of China then they are living in a world of their own.

I had to laugh yesterday after reading one George Foulks backing the take over. This is the same George, who in one of his sober moments, pushed for the take over of Hearts football club by yet another control freak. I do not think he should be passing advice on take overs.
240

westview,

try try try again. 12/11/2008 14:46:48
This is economic warfare by the southern establishment. Another form of removing Scots influence. By the way ,I noted that the Saltire was removed from the flag staff at the Glasgow George square Armistice commemoration on Tuesday and a Union flag flown in its place. On Sunday ,in the main square in Johnstone, the Saltire was missing from its usual flag pole but the European Union flag and the British Union flag were still flying, at the Armistice ceremony. This takes place round a statue of a "kilty" soldier. Why fly non Scottish flags but not our own one ,here in the West of Scotland?
241

Quinag,

12/11/2008 14:46:50
Gordon & Alistair must hardly have believed their luck, when this situation arose. They can portray themselves as ''saving'' a Scottish bank, meanwhile dissing the SNP's' arc of prosperity' claim. And the usual suspects voted labour in Glenrothes - 'ma faither, & his faither, voted labour, so it's guid enough fur me!'
I strongly believe that GB, AD & the treasury, with Mandelson's help, are spinning against any further HBOS offers, & actively discouraging bidders.
I don't have much time for Nationalism, but relish seeing the Scottish Labour establishment squirming, after years of virtual hegemony, north of the border. Don't care whether it's SNP, SLD or even the Tories, or Progressives, as they should revert to, in Scotland.
This, to me, is the usual scenario of London & the South East sucking the life out of other UK regions, & countries. That bloated, oversubsidised, overcrowded distant corner of the country, & it's parochial inhabitants, cannot lift their eyes above the M25.
The poisonous comments & scorn heaped upon the Scottish financial institutions, by Peston, & his fellow hacks writing in the London broadsheets, are proof to me of the attitude - ' Who do those Scots think they are, having any sort of financial centre & 2 major bank headquarters' So much of what I've read over the past 4wks has been inaccurate, & now they are turning on Burt & Mathewson. Initially taken seriously, there now appears to be a concerted attempt to portray them as self serving geriatrics, who were never very competent before they retired either.
I was never happy after BOS became HBOS, but stuck with them, hoever I feel more strongly than ever, that we will be losing more than just jobs, after this ''merger''. An historic Scottish institution which has existed for 300yrs will completely disappear, & it makes me extremely sad, & angry, at the way it is happening.
242

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/11/2008 14:49:31
#263 "I wrote earlier that my understanding is this type of deal takes 6 months or so."

I agree - it's also why I believe most of these alternative bids are complete non-starters.

Waiting 6 months for BoC to possibly put in a bid when one is in the table - not a difficult choice - is it? BoC probably recognised that they were not even at the races when it came to bidding and pulled out to avoid wasting any more time and money.

More likely though that they may also have had second thoughts when they saw what a basket-case HBOS was.

Even with the capitalisation support I would be tempted as an LTSB shareholder to reject the merger. It is LTSB shareholders who can scupper this deal not HBOS shareholders. HBOS shareholders gain from this deal more than if the bank were to remain independent. However, I just cannot see either 50% of LTSB shareholders or 25% of HBOS shareholders voting against this deal.

It will happen - these pie-in-th-sky alternatives have been a distraction from the real issue. The real issue is to make sure it happens in such a way that the least damage is done to jobs and so on.
243

vimto,

12/11/2008 14:49:32
268. Anyone but England,you lot make me sick!
244

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 15:11:05
273 Gordon Brown set the conditions so that it was easy to take out those loans to fuel his economic boom, Did he not say in his first budget I will not allow house price inflation to affect the economy no return to boom and bust? Aye Gordon had no affect on the credit boom in the UK and didn't use it to fuel the economy?

Tell me sm753 did Murphy's meeting with Spowart discuss a possible rival bidder? No name mind you but they did discuss a possible rival bid and what did that do?

Fed @ 271 I have no argument with you over the mechanics my argument is that HMG are spinning and trying to control the agenda, BOC might have had a look and said no thanks and nobody would have none, no packdrill see you boys.

But HMG just cannot allow natural events too take place.
245

KarenL,

12/11/2008 15:14:40
#216

We don't know how the Government got their information about BOC. The Government has brokered the deal between HBOS and Lloyds and is trying to force it through but they have at present no shareholder vote.
246

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 15:16:38
273 Personal responsibility and Gordon Brown an oxymoron indeed.
247

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

12/11/2008 15:16:40
#273 Murphy's leaking I believe may not have been deliberate. The leak to Peston at first glance though looks far more suspicious. I did a little digging and this is what I found.

Peston has links to John Kingman, the Treasury's Second Permanent Secretary. Peston was the Financial Times financial editor and a member of its editorial board whilst Mr Kingman ran the FT's Lex column between 1995 and 1997. To add further spice to the pot - Mr Kingman was Gordon Brown's Press Secretary between 1999 and 2000.

Why leak?

One possibility, as some have alleged here, was to stymie the Chinese bid. I just don't see how that conclusion can be reached - not unless Peston had mentioned specific details of the bid. But he did not - because he did not have them. Most of his blog focussed on the fact that LTSB had already lent HBOS £10 billion and that any bidder would have to repay that loan.

The other possibility, and much more likely, was that they wanted to see if the Chinese bid was serious.

Even if the BoC involvement had not been leaked, with the Sunday Time publishing news of the LTSB loan to HBOS, it is almost certain that the Chinese thought - no way.
248

Warden An' All, Reborn,

12/11/2008 15:20:22
Imagine what the chinese could do if they still blamed scotland for the poison we half killed their people with, opium. One of the few main sellers to the chinese was a scot.
249

KarenL,

12/11/2008 15:21:51
#218

You have not understood the point I made. I too lived in Hong Kong. The character similarities between Scots and Chinese and their synergies in working together have been noted by the Chinese. The capture of Hong Kong and the Opium Wars are history and not going to be repeated. The Chinese recognised this when they permitted RBS to buy into BOC and BOC has indeed reaffirmed its committment despite the bail out of RBS.
250

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 15:22:07
277 KarenL the government is underwriting the share offer, any possible bidder would have to contact them. HMG are involved in the deal as they say in poker "they are all in".
251

KarenL,

12/11/2008 15:41:18
#279

It is a credit facility and not a loan, similar to when you open a bank account and the bank may give you an overdraft facility. It doesn't mean you will use it. HBOS has a credit facility with Lloyds in the same way that LLoyds has credit facilities with other banks. HBOS cannot go bust because it is operating under Government guarantee. This is nothing to do with LLoyds. LLoyds have done their due diligence and they know that HBOS is not in such a bad condition. If it was they would not be buying it.
252

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 15:47:42
284 If that is the case I would not be too happy as a shareholder of Lloyds. If HBOS is in thae state the obvious solution would be to nationalise it.

Fix it and sell it on.
253

KarenL,

12/11/2008 15:48:03
#283
The share offer is not relevant to a take over. If there is a foreign bidder, the share offer does not go ahead. ie if BOC or any other buyer comes up with cash, they buy out the equity holders and HM Treasury is not required to get involved. It is a private commercial transaction supervised by the Takeover Board and approved by the shareholders.


In the end money talks. If any buyer can make a decent cash offer, the shareholders will grab it. It is a better deal than holding shares in the merged bank which could become the next AIG.
254

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 15:54:56
fed @ 279 my post has disappeared oh well I'll try again I wrote that due to the timescales the BOC would have probably made a quick decision and then left with no pack drill, end off

I think that the leaks were done because off an obessions with the agenda and spinning, HMG cannot leave somethings alone.
255

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 16:02:30
288 @ KarenL all the media spinning and leaks point to a government that cannot leave this alone, the deal between Lloyds and HBOS is being handled by HMG no doubt.

After all they pushed through against the advice of the OFT.

If HBOS is in a bad a state as suggested by sm753 they would be better to nationalise instead of endangering Lloyds as well.
256

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 16:14:10
sm753 you said

"Most of his blog focussed on the fact that LTSB had already lent HBOS £10 billion and that any bidder would have to repay that loan."

Yes, and the clear implication is that if LTSB had not lent the £10bn and agreed to buy HBOS then we would be looking at a bust bank right now.

It is as I feared all along. Brown & co cannot say too much about the real state of HBOS for fear that LTSB turn, walk and leave them with the corpse.

You said it was a corpse not I, so if you believe what you wrote are the government and LTSB not being honest about the true state of HBOS?

If HBOS is in a terrible state surely that will have an impact on the trading of the new bank and put a strain on it's balance sheet.

What will the social and financial cost of the merger be to the taxpayer? will it be more or less than nationalisation?
257

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 16:15:20
# 297

If Barack Obama gets off to a flying start I wouldn't bet against parity with the dollar in a few months time. Would certainly be good for markets exporting to the USA or people who do e-commerce in US Dollars.
258

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 16:29:18
306 I liked mine curried.
259

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 16:36:12
No sm753 the point is that if HBOS is in a worst state than is admitted the shareholders of LTSB are being sold a pup without them being given all the information. That's plain wrong no justification.

This pup might then put LTSB into a perilous state and we are right back to square one.

Which ever option the taxpayer is going to pick up the tab, at present nobody can honestly say what the butchers bill will be.

What option will have the least social and financial affect on the nation should be chosen and if that is nationalisation so be it.
260

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 16:45:59
314 I posted this earlier:-

Personal responsibility and Gordon Brown an oxymoron indeed!
261

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 16:48:30
Hoots I think in a short wee while a certain GB will be going to Europa asking kindly about Euro membership it would be funny it they said Non Na Nae blogger off!
262

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 16:49:01
317 ROTFL
263

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 16:51:34
318 Le Lutin apparently oil is an commodity that it would be dangerous to base you economy on, compared to that well loved and imperious cheap international credit backed my mortgage securities surely nobody would use that commodity would they!
264

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 16:52:29
# 319

Chances are it won't be long now until currency traders start to make a run on sterling
265

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 16:55:49
313 So if HBOS is a basket case as you implied are the shareholders being lied to?

It has everything to do with the government as they are going to be the lender of last resort they have to be honest with the shareholders and the public. Or do you think that HMG has given LTSB a cast iron assurance that it will give them what ever they need?
266

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:01:21
326 @ 330 colleagues of mine in Corporate Finance have muttered warnings of a run on the currency as the true debt levels are exposed not the sham reported by HMG as the markets look at the balance sheet and can see the true level of debt not the myth of Gordon.
267

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 17:02:30
It is time now for the Scottish Government to build an economy based on renewable energy by setting up a government owned company to operate the project. That way the profits will go to the Scottish Government to invest in infrastructure. The company can work in collaberation with Scottish Power and SSE so as not to be in competition with them. The potential in renewables in Scotland could make it comparable to the Norewegian Statoil. As far as I'm aware there is nothin in the Scotland Act that would prevent such a project. Time is of the essence though. The UK Government is going to amend the Scotland Act soon so the Scottish Government cannot block new nuclear power stations.
268

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:05:17
338 I think you got a winner there package it up and sell the product as "Peat Holdings LTSB DCB Humphrey Shagnasty" to some poor sod in Singapore.

269

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:09:09
I think I've got a medal of there's! :-)
270

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:12:27
Gardiloo PLC
271

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:14:23
348 Air Fungus?
272

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:15:27
351 LOL.
273

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:23:46
355 I had an account with them, I mostly posted on the Hootsman though, I had a look at the new forums rubbish, I think they will lose a lot of advertising revenue.
274

,

12/11/2008 17:25:38
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
275

PC Caledonia,

12/11/2008 17:36:47
The silly stuff has started a bit early tonight.
276

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:39:42
360 No not by my logic, you were the one that said it was basket case and the true level of problems were not being told to us not I.

HBOS / LTSB and the government have to be honest with everybody as we all have a share in this one way or another.

If HMG were honest and told us what the real state was we could make a judgement on whether to nationalise or not, as I said either way the tax payer is going to pick up the tab.

So how much will the takeover cost compared the cost of nationalisation. If we have a clearer picture we can make a more informed choice

And if HBOS is worse than stated there will be additional costs in the new bank because of those problems.

It comes down to honesty.
277

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:44:06
363 sm753 you are very good at going backwards.
278

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 17:46:27
# 339

There is also the potential to develop world leading expertise in renewables. The world is going to have to end its dependency on fossil fuel and as for nuclear there is only a limited amount of uranium in the Earth as well. Who is going to act as consultants when China and India wake up to their need to adopt renewable power? The answer - those who have already developed commercial renewables, ironed out the kinks and learned to build in economies of scale.


"Or that, while there may be jobs and value in designing and building renewable projects, there is sod all in operating them?"

Mechanical components require alot of maintenance. Plenty of them in an offshore windfarm.
279

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:47:52
sm753 you never told me if you are a Scot?
280

Churchill W.,

12/11/2008 17:48:19
This deal makes sense to LTSB as it eliminates a High Street competitor where HBOS is there. Why would the UK government sell a UK bank to a foreign competitor, i.e. The Bank of China, when the UK banking sector is in sh!t-street?
That logic might make sense to Alec Salmond and his diminishing, commission seeking cabal. Salmond is being his usual dog-in-the-manger here, he would rather see the whole UK banking sector being at risk to suit his narrow political horizons.
Even David Cameron MP has seen through Salmond's pretensions!
281

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:50:56
372 Iain when I worked for an engineering company it was all about servicing the box, that's were the money was.

Many Manufactures make a small profit on the sale, what they want is the three year service deal that's were the money is.

The box could be a PC, Car or bin lorry it's was all about servicing the box.
282

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:52:46
374 After your post earlier on why should we believe somebody as ignorant as you.
283

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 12/11/2008 17:57:03
378 two bob and a golf ball.
284

Churchill W.,

12/11/2008 18:03:36
Tormod # 377

Being a bit po-faced are you not?

Why would the UK government welcome a foreign competitor bank on to the UK "High Street?" Would The Bank of China be subject to UK competition rules on its worldwide businesses?
I suspect the introduction of the BOC into the HBOS equation is a "Trojan Horse" operation by Salmond and the bankers he is palling around with.
285

DaveK,

Edinburgh 12/11/2008 18:15:42
# 382
That would be a rescue package with money from UK taxpayers/councils and companies that they have lost.
286

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 18:19:18
# 381

A foreign takeover would inject money into the UK economy and China are in the unique position (along with a few Arab states) of having money to burn. The Lloyds takeover on the other hand is just moving money within the UK's ailing economy, money that the government has borrowed and could well still be paying back when our grandchildren reach retirement age.

The UK faced a similar situation in the late 1970s, having to be bailed out by the IMF and Thatcher was able to use North Sea oil to underwrite it and fund her economic reforms. In terms of an equivalent to the economic tonic the North Sea was in the '70s we have no rabbits in the hat this time. We also have nothing of the manufacturing sector we had then or the national assets Thatcher flogged off at bargain basement prices.

There is not going to be a quick fix to this. Without international investment the UK Government can only render first aid.
287

,

12/11/2008 18:28:54
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
288

Patrick O'Reilly,

Coatbridge 12/11/2008 18:48:32
Economists said that the world economy was sound. Economists said that the banks were in control. An economist said that the SNP would win Glenrothes. It just goes to show that you can't trust economists.
289

Churchill W.,

12/11/2008 18:58:41
IainGlasgow # 384

Ultimately, profits would be expatriated to the economy that provided the rescue funds, China, Saudia Arabia, wherever. Assets would be stripped and the smoking hulk of HBOS could be sold to LTSB. The BOC of China is not going to give any promises to HMG, because HMG would have no leverage over The BOC. HMG would have, at least, some leverage over LTSB because HMG is providing guarantees there and providing some funding.
Any funds that BOC or the Saudis provide will come will come with huge penalties and will ultimately be underwritten by HMG. If the UK government is going to bar the risks it will be better where the UK government has some control. That being said can anyone trust UK banks and bankers anymore, the banks do not trust one another, why should ANYBODY else trust them?
290

KarenL,

12/11/2008 19:12:40
#293 - True the Government cannot leave this alone but any serious bidders who are being obstructed can go to the EU as did Mittal when the French Government tried to obstruct his takeover of the French steel company. The EU would love nothing better than to give the British Government a hammering.
291

Ewan M,

12/11/2008 19:16:40
Come on sell HBOS to the Chinese. I notice the SNP aren't even jumping on this bandwagon.

I find it sad that some people choose to blame HBOS's plight on the UK, isn't it down to the management?
292

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 19:20:52
# 388

The UK Government is concerned primarily with saving the Financial Services Sector and Finance jobs in London. Only if London's financial services will not suffer will the UK Government act to preserve Financial Services outside the M25 (or outside the "City" for that matter).

Gordon Brown will only do the best thing for Edinburgh if by some coincidence it is also the best thing for the City of London.
293

Churchill W.,

12/11/2008 19:33:54
IainGlasgow # 391

Would the smoking remnants of Edinburgh's financial sector survive if The City of London failed?
294

MeMyself&I@home,

Home 12/11/2008 19:49:30
90% of you are clearly mental and don't understand or can't accept why/that HBOS is a broken bank.

Nuts.
295

SNP hypocrisy,

12/11/2008 20:06:26
Oh sure give control of our banks to the Communists who are currently fighting hard to dominate the worlds manufacturing. Great idea. Let's rename it the Chairman Mao bank.
296

Churchill W.,

12/11/2008 20:10:40

Scottish bankers should be investigated for criminal offences. Angus MacNeill MP SNP used to be very vigorous in reporting putative criminal offences.
Why is he so reticent, now, in questioning possible criminal offences amongst Scottish bankers?
297

Churchill W.,

12/11/2008 20:13:21
SNP hypocrisy # 394

Why does Salmond want to sign many thousands of Scottish banks accounts over to The Bank Of China?
What is in it for him?
298

Churchill W.,

12/11/2008 20:20:57
sm753 # 397

You know better than that. Are Salmond and his new pals saying that this a good thing, then, is there something in it for them.
Nobody says Salmond shouldn't make some money from the deal, but, if he is, we should know how much him and his pals are making. Then we can all decide whether their actions are altruistic, nationalistic, or, just greedy.
299

Churchill W.,

12/11/2008 20:22:25
sm753 # 398

Salmond is promoting any deal other than the one that is on the table, why?
300

Churchill W.,

12/11/2008 20:35:43
sm753 # 401

The Chinese are very pragmatic nowadays, how about a numbered account in a far away place?
301

brownlie,

12/11/2008 20:38:17
401 s,753

Congratulations - you've found someone with the same intellectual 'immensity' as your own.
302

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 20:39:13
I'm new here is Winston Churchill the comic turn ?
303

vimto,

12/11/2008 20:40:40
386. DIDN'T YOURS DIE A FEW MONTHS AGO,NO,PITY!
304

Observer. 1,

Glasgow 12/11/2008 20:42:26
Is he a double act with vimto ? Someone clue me in I am a poor refugee from the Herald.
305

mesmiths,

fife 12/11/2008 20:44:41
Wow. Another union dividend. We don't want it. They do. It's not up to us. It's what's best. It's what's gonna happen. And they're holding this up as an example of why we should fear independence.

It's sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo time!
306

brownlie,

12/11/2008 20:44:56
405 vimto

Good evening, gorgeous and gracious one, have you got over your bad day yesterday?
307

brownlie,

12/11/2008 21:03:10
405 vimto

You never call me and you do not answer my postings. I shall take hemlock and die a long lingering death out of unrequited love.

Farewell, sweet maiden!
308

IainGlasgow,

12/11/2008 21:14:38
# 400

To preserve banking jobs and headquarters decision making functions in Scotland. He has also tried to persuade the Lloyds TSB board of the case for that. His enthusiasm for the "other options" has been at best luke warm. As for Alex Neil he always has been a bit of a Maverick.

Annabel Goldie and Tavish Scott have also spoken out against the Lloyds TSB deal.
309

Scunnert,

12/11/2008 22:35:06
Thatcher stripped us of our heavy industries. Brown is stripping us of our financial sector. He now wants to strip us of our National Football team.

Put your money in the Bank of Ireland and boycott the London olympics.
310

Wynn,

CLYDESDALE 12/11/2008 22:39:24
Like they did in S. America and Africa, China has already taken over large lumps of Murikkka and that by peaceful means.....

How else could Dubbya have paid for his wars? It kept him financially afloat...

So where's the harm in letting them buy into a large lump of the U.K.?



311

Proximaking,

Stonehaven 12/11/2008 22:59:17
good to see the chinese are learning to do what they are told.
312

puskas,

East kilbride 12/11/2008 23:04:51
I have an account with HBOS..

A few hrs ago I received an e.mail from Lloyds TSB telling me to click a few buttons on my internet account to transfer over to them..

My reply of course was returned.

Have any others who post on these topics received e.mail.

Premature to say the least.

What does the board think..

Cheers all.
313

Edwardg,

12/11/2008 23:39:48
*417 Sure its from Lloyds TSB and not someone from Nigeria? ;)
314

Churchill W.,

13/11/2008 08:41:15
Newsflash:

HBOS taken over by The Bank of Nigeria. Salmond hails move as proof of his strategy.
315

JScharen,

13/11/2008 10:52:42
I think part of the reason BoC walked away from the deal is the recent announcement by the UK stating explicitly that Tibet is part of China (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/11/dalai-lama-china-tibet-miliband). The UK government has never been so explicit about Tibet's status for nearly a century as mentioned by an article from the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122549900302589905.html). I think China is just returning the favour by turning a blind eye on Scottish interests (a.k.a. weaken them so they wouldn't demand independence from the UK).
316

JCA REID,

Annan 13/11/2008 14:34:04
In the background to this financial mess is PM Brown's delight at ensuring Scotland is absolutely subsumed and exists in name only!
Strange for a fellow who spoke of endorsing Scottish Independence - just see/hear him speak on You-Tube on the subject!!
317

Missbehave (Princess Fiona),

15/11/2008 03:26:23
When you moved this firm from Halifax it was sound.

a few months and the whole building society sector is bankrupt.

enjoy your free time you've earned it.

 

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.