Petem95

Watch Darling squirm on TV at 16.00!

Yet another big **** by Labour!

Shark Man

Reminds me of Rover back in the 70's

Petem95

I can't think how this is going to work! Surely their mortgages will be sold off - you can't have people being reposessed with a government backed mortgage?!

But then you can't have a government banks lending money!! Savings ok, but nothing more.

Wonder what the shareholders will get too - could be people will considerable sums in NR shares as their savings/pension. Surely going to all get 500p a share or something?

SlimJ_2005

"The decision will be a blow to the bank's shareholders - who will receive next-to-nothing in the short term for their shares."

BBC NEWS | The Reporters | Robert Peston

Sounds like not a lot.

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

Stop







































recession time!

Prasius

iTrader: (1)

And quite right too - you buy shares in a business that fails, you lose your money. Tough Titty. If it had been anything other than a financial institution it would have totally folded already.

As for Nationalisation though.... hmmmm.... Socialism at work. Top Stuff.

GOLDMAN 555

****

kingofturds

iTrader: (1)

That was a great success, billions pissed away down the drain surely they have learnt from their mistakes

Prasius

iTrader: (1)

Idiot from the "Northern Rock Small Shareholders Group" saying that they've had their company "stolen" from them by the government and that because they've lost all their money they are going to demand compensation.

What the hell are these idiots on?! The company they held stocks in failed, collapsed, went **** up; "Northern Rock" as it stands now isn't the company they held shares in - that company has long gone. Why the hell should WE, the public, foot the bill again because a bunch of idiots don't understand the principles of shareholding.

The public purse has had enough of a battering because of the buffoons these shareholders presumably voted in as the MD and board of Northern Rock; why the hell should we now pay them because they can't run a business?

Brit_in_Japan

And when the Conservative government in 1984 nationalised Johnson Matthey Bank, did that make Maggie Thatcher a socialist?

fast bloke

The general equilibrium will be maintained. Taxpayer will eventually lose nothing, shareholders will lose a bagful and Gordon Brown will claim that the 'golden rules' have been broken in order to bail out finacial institution and restore confidence in the economy. GB will cut spending and the recession will be blamed on NR and sub prime losses. (At long last Pete is correct and he can be the next PM )

_Meridian_

iTrader: (1)

You don't understand, it was different if Thatcher did it.


M

boxst

One thing I don't understand: At what stage do the other banks cry 'foul'? There must be some competition problem here? If another bank gets into trouble (hopefully not), will they expect to be rescued as well?

Steve

lozgti

As to all those little shareholders that had their shares free in the first place.Tough.Free gambling gone wrong

As to those people that bought shares over the years to make some money.Double tough.Gamblers can't be moaners

As to the big Hedge fund boys that bought millions to make millions..

As to the story........how embarrassing is that!We are looking after a Bank

PeteBrant

Or indeed the Conservatives.


Darling has make a complete **** of himself though - In November he agreed, when asked, that Nationalisation would mean a slow agonising death for NR, with many job losses and a fatal blow to Britians reputation as the financial capital of the world.

Why agree to that when Nationalisation was obviously a realisitic option?

David Lock

Just heard Darling on Radio 4, not an interview he will have enjoyed

Some while back a labour MP had said that nationalisation would mean a slow lingering death for NR and its workforce and Darling was quoted in Hansard as agreeing completely with these sentiments. So Humpreys went for the jugular on this one. Painful to listen to......

What I can't quite get my head around is that if NR is currently worthless as evidenced by shareholders getting sod all then I can't quite see how HMG expects to get back many billions over the next few years. Can someone enlighten me? dl

SJ_Skyline

Can we expect to see Darling "reshuffled" in the near future?

davegtt

Everyone can see this is going to be one big massive mistake, why cant the government see it also?

PeteBrant

I don't think that's quite true - Lots of financial people think it should have been nationalised long ago. The problem with a commerical sale is that any buyer is not necessarily going to have the tax payer forefront in mind.

Prasius

iTrader: (1)

Having reflected on it a bit - the bank had to be "rescued" in order to retain public confidence in the banking system, lots of public money was required, private buyers were looked for - all of them, understandably, want it for a pittance because of the big chunk of risk that it is, the government can't let them have it for a pittance because they need to get the public money that was ploughed into it back.

So.. what do they do -

1. Sell NR to a private buyer and lose billions because they don't want to buy a duck thats not just lame, but missing both legs.

2. Return monies to account holders/sell current loans and mortgages to another lender and lose billions?

3. "Nationalise" NR and try to cut back on the stupid mortages and loans, back fill the hole its got into and sell it as a business that is actually capable of making some money?

Contary to my initial disbelief at the whole thing; maybe NR won't suffer quite as badly as companies such as BMC did in the 1970's from Government intervention. I would, perhaps naively given the state that NR got into, think that a Bank is a bit less complicated to run than a car manufacturer.

PeteBrant

There are still a few issues that need detail.

(i)The bank is still open for new business. Is it fair to other banks in a competative market to have one bank offering a savings plan that is effectively underwritten by the Bank of England?

(ii)Should Northern Rock be profit making whilst it is state owned?

(iii)Are Northern Rock employees now Public Sector workers? What sort of redundancy packages etc apply?

I mean obviously they are going to slim it down, get rid of the sub prime stuff and then sell it - but that may be harder than it sounds.

That said, Nationalisation was pretty much the only option probably.

lozgti

Does not the whole thing reek of desperation though?

Do you think they ever imagined having to carry one of the biggest mortgage players off the field on a stretcher?

I think this story is huge news even if others don't.I'm pretty gobsmacked at the figures involved...and its no good going on about a 'great mortgage book' all the time.Where are all NR's profits from what they had been up to?

Leslie

Surely it all depends on the housing market and our economy. If all thats goes **** up like in America, we are in deep trouble. As if we are not already!

Les

PeteBrant

Of course it's huge news, but what were the alternatives?

To be fair, if people didn't completely overreact and cause the first run on a bank in a century, this mess probably wouldn't have happened.

Luan Pra bang

Actually the bank of England rescued Johnson Matthey not Thatcher. The amount of money involved was very small and now that same company is in the footsie 100. Remarkably Tony Blair was on his high horse about how wrong it was to rescue a bank and how a government should not do such things but somehow I think he will keep his mouth shut now but Labour hypocrisy is nothing new.
When JM was taken over it it was very much in the interest of the tax payer and did not involve giving a ridiculously large loan first. But don't let the facts get in the way of putting down one pf the greatest leaders this country ever had. (Thatcher)

PeteBrant

Are you saying that doing everything possible to rescue Northern rock was against the interests of the economy?

StickyMicky

who was the chap from SN who supposedly bought a squillion shares in NR ?

Shark Man

What? £2.50's worth?

MikeCardiff

iTrader: (2)

I think the shareholders are having a laugh whining - they bought shares in a company hoping to make money off them, and didnt - the value of your investment can go up or down and all that. I bet if they had made a killing off them they wouldnt be offering to give some of the money back because they felt guilty about making too much from it.

Lets be honest, most people who dabble on the stock exchange have a decent amount of money to begin with. If they cant afford to lose money on an investment they should put it in a nice safe savings account with a lower return.

Not sure if the government arent doing the only thing they can in the situation though - there werent exactly people gagging to buy NR, and those that were just wanted to get a bargain from a company that was in trouble.

I'm sure a lot of it has to do with keeping confidence in the banks etc... but I havent heard of any other lenders getting into as much trouble as NR.

speedking

I don't understand where the big numbers are coming from £11bn is being used to prop up the bank, £3300 per UK resident. Where has that money gone? Surely for every pound spent, someone somewhere has benefited to the tune of £1? When all the mortgages are paid off in 40 years time will that sum have reduced to zero? i.e. it is really a cash flow problem.

I suffered when Network Rail was nationalised (albeit under another guise) but at least got back about 50% of the value of the shares, and that was a company that was solvent I wouldn't trust the government to run the bank.