RBS Announces Losses

#1
Look mam, I'm in Current Affairs! Anyhow, RBS has announced losses of £2bn. Quite how a (partly state owned) bank can be so up to it in der sheisse and still squander £1bn on bonuses is beyond me. Maybe I'm being simplistic, but perhaps if they shelved their self-awarded back slaps for a couple of years they'd make up the shortfall? The whole senior management of RBS want sacking - along with all the other inept muppets who leave a trail of disater wherever they tread. Since when was being shit at your job something to aspire to?

RBS announces £2bn losses - Channel 4 News
 
#2
There will be a lot of very clever people trying to ensure that the RBS share price doesn't recover so that when the government eventually flog off their massive holdings, they go for peanuts.

Personally I'd be surprised if it ever made a substantial profit again whilst in public ownership.
 
#3
There will be a lot of very clever people trying to ensure that the RBS share price doesn't recover so that when the government eventually flog off their massive holdings, they go for peanuts.

Personally I'd be surprised if it ever made a substantial profit again whilst in public ownership.
At close of play today RBS Share price: 28.72 % Change: 5.09 % Change: 1.39
 
#5
Forhive me for being thick here, but surely bonuses are paid when they are doing well? If £1bn is bonuses, then that means that it is still in the Red to the tune of £1bn, and therefore no-one deserves a bonus? And if it is state owned (I think 82% rings a bell) shouldnt it be state regulated....?
 
#6
Forhive me for being thick here, but surely bonuses are paid when they are doing well? If £1bn is bonuses, then that means that it is still in the Red to the tune of £1bn, and therefore no-one deserves a bonus? And if it is state owned (I think 82% rings a bell) shouldnt it be state regulated....?
Young fool.

It's in public ownership now, and as Sir Humphrey Appleby tells us, civil servants measure success by activity, and not by results.
 
#7
Young fool.

It's in public ownership now, and as Sir Humphrey Appleby tells us, civil servants measure success by activity, and not by results.
A key issue raised by yer man who runs Vanguard, and in a less eloquent way by me here. It's just New Labour brought it to its apogee...
 
#8
Forhive me for being thick here, but surely bonuses are paid when they are doing well? If £1bn is bonuses, then that means that it is still in the Red to the tune of £1bn, and therefore no-one deserves a bonus? And if it is state owned (I think 82% rings a bell) shouldnt it be state regulated....?
The bonuses will be, as so many other high-level bonuses are, linked to achievement of personal rather than corporate objectives - introduce this or that policy, draft this or that document, etc.

These are highly skilled individuals, whose main skill seems to be ensuring nothing gets between them and their 'entitlements'. You don't seriously think they'd allow their take-home pay to be linked to anything so uncertain as the consequences of their decisions?

If it's been sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk then I'm probably pissed.
 
#9
If Scotland gets independence will they take their bank with them or will we still foot the bill?.
 
#10
Maybe I'm being simplistic, but perhaps if they shelved their self-awarded back slaps for a couple of years they'd make up the shortfall?
Perhaps I should cut my staff wages right back and save some money. I'm sure they'll work just as hard, and none will think about jumping ship to my much higher paying competitors.

Sounds like a winning strategy. I'm glad we met.
 
#11
Forhive me for being thick here, but surely bonuses are paid when they are doing well? If £1bn is bonuses, then that means that it is still in the Red to the tune of £1bn, and therefore no-one deserves a bonus? And if it is state owned (I think 82% rings a bell) shouldnt it be state regulated....?
Bonuses will have probably only go to the top 10% of earners and achievers - as is the situation in other industries. Most would have got squat or an "At Risk" conversation with HR. No CEA or total health cover in the City, no HDT, no uniform maint.

Sack the top boys and you can double your losses - that's traders, IT specialists, investment bankers that still have clients willing to chat with them.

That's life, the top 10% of tennis players, musicians, journalists, politicians, authors are the same - earn more than the rest put together.

What our mong politicians didn't realise is that 50% (or more ) of cash bonuses went back to the taxpayer ........ around Feburary, because that's when bonuses are paid. Now, with reduced cash bonuses and anything else paid in deferred stock ( shares in the company), we, the taxpayer get less money from the Bankers.

Edited to add - cash bonus is taxed at 50% ( Real rate closer to 70%), stock/ shares taxed at 21%. As Pyiainno says, keep the stock price down, wait until the government sell low because the newspapers are screaming for blood - wait for the bounce - double your money and half your tax risk !!

Aren't you glad our MPs know sooooo much about finance :)
Great plan eh Baldrick !!
 
#12
Bonuses will have probably only go to the top 10% of earners and achievers - as is the situation in other industries. Most would have got squat or an "At Risk" conversation with HR. No CEA or total health cover in the City, no HDT, no uniform maint.

Stop paying a bonus to the top boys and you can double your losses - that's traders, IT specialists, investment bankers that still have clients willing to chat with them.

That's life, the top 10% of tennis players, musicians, journalists, politicians, authors are the same - earn more than the rest put together.

What our mong politicians didn't realise is that 50% (or more ) of cash bonuses went back to the taxpayer ........ around Feburary, because that's when bonuses are paid. Now, with reduced cash bonuses and anything else paid in deferred stock ( shares in the company), we, the taxpayer get less money from the Bankers.

Edited to add - cash bonus is taxed at 50% ( Real rate closer to 70%), stock/ shares taxed at 21%. As Pyianno says, keep the stock price down, wait until the government sell low because the newspapers are screaming for blood - wait for the bounce - double your money and half your tax risk !!

Aren't you glad our MPs know sooooo much about finance :)

Great plan eh Baldrick !!
 
#13
Look mam, I'm in Current Affairs! Anyhow, RBS has announced losses of £2bn. Quite how a (partly state owned) bank can be so up to it in der sheisse and still squander £1bn on bonuses is beyond me. Maybe I'm being simplistic, but perhaps if they shelved their self-awarded back slaps for a couple of years they'd make up the shortfall? The whole senior management of RBS want sacking - along with all the other inept muppets who leave a trail of disater wherever they tread. Since when was being shit at your job something to aspire to?

RBS announces £2bn losses - Channel 4 News
It's rewarding 'success', didn't you know? Funnily enough the company I work for pays bonuses only if it makes sufficient profit to be able to afford them...
 
#15
Forhive me for being thick here, but surely bonuses are paid when they are doing well? If £1bn is bonuses, then that means that it is still in the Red to the tune of £1bn, and therefore no-one deserves a bonus?
Jesus ****ing christ. How do you suggest they motivate their staff to get it out of the red if they don't offer them bonuses? If you want decent people, you have to pay competitive wages.
 
#16
In mitigation (and aside from the issue of whether or not bonuses should be paid) things at RBS have beenn improving:

The bank's balance sheet has reduced but it still stands at £1.4tn. But it is still a dramatic cut from the £2.2tn that the bank had ballooned to by the time it was bailed out by the taxpayer in 2008.

Hester published what he called his "three-year report card" which shows that while the share price might be giving taxpayers a £20bn paper loss on their 82% stake, other elements of the plan are ahead of schedule.

The core tier one ratio - the main measure of the cushion of capital that the bank holds - has moved from 4% at its worse to 10.6%, above the 10% target. The loan-to-deposit ratio - which measures whether the bank has enough deposits to cover the loans it grants - has shrunk from 154% to 108% against a target of equilibrium (100%) by 2013.

The bank is also holding more liquid assets, which can be sold easily during times of crisis, up from £90bn to £155bn, compared with a target of £150bn. The leverage ratio - which the Bank of England believes offers a measure of riskiness and measures assets divided by core tier one - has fallen from 28.7 times to 16.9. The target was for 18.

And in terms of returns to shareholders, the return on equity has improved from minus 31% to 10.5% - although is still below the 12% (revised from 15%) that Hester is aiming for in 2013. In terms of cost-income ratios, the main measure of efficiency, there has been a improvement from the 97% in 2008 but it still stands at 60% - higher than the target of 55% that he wants to reach in 2013.

None of this can distract from the fact that the salvage costs have now reached £42bn, swamping the £33bn of profits generated during this time.

As Hester pointed out, most of the problems rest with property lending, and particularly in Ireland.

But if lending to small businesses is also a measure that is being closely watched, RBS might fail the test: lending contracted by nearly £2bn to this sector in 2011, despite the claims by Hester that it was lending well above its market share.

Royal Bank Of Scotland's Three-Year Report Card Analysed
 
#17
In mitigation (and aside from the issue of whether or not bonuses should be paid) things at RBS have beenn improving:

The bank's balance sheet has reduced but it still stands at £1.4tn. But it is still a dramatic cut from the £2.2tn that the bank had ballooned to by the time it was bailed out by the taxpayer in 2008.

Hester published what he called his "three-year report card" which shows that while the share price might be giving taxpayers a £20bn paper loss on their 82% stake, other elements of the plan are ahead of schedule.

The core tier one ratio - the main measure of the cushion of capital that the bank holds - has moved from 4% at its worse to 10.6%, above the 10% target. The loan-to-deposit ratio - which measures whether the bank has enough deposits to cover the loans it grants - has shrunk from 154% to 108% against a target of equilibrium (100%) by 2013.

The bank is also holding more liquid assets, which can be sold easily during times of crisis, up from £90bn to £155bn, compared with a target of £150bn. The leverage ratio - which the Bank of England believes offers a measure of riskiness and measures assets divided by core tier one - has fallen from 28.7 times to 16.9. The target was for 18.

And in terms of returns to shareholders, the return on equity has improved from minus 31% to 10.5% - although is still below the 12% (revised from 15%) that Hester is aiming for in 2013. In terms of cost-income ratios, the main measure of efficiency, there has been a improvement from the 97% in 2008 but it still stands at 60% - higher than the target of 55% that he wants to reach in 2013.

None of this can distract from the fact that the salvage costs have now reached £42bn, swamping the £33bn of profits generated during this time.

As Hester pointed out, most of the problems rest with property lending, and particularly in Ireland.

But if lending to small businesses is also a measure that is being closely watched, RBS might fail the test: lending contracted by nearly £2bn to this sector in 2011, despite the claims by Hester that it was lending well above its market share.

Royal Bank Of Scotland's Three-Year Report Card Analysed
You seem a well 'informed analytical person' not seen a contribution from you on the 'Financial Apocalypse' thread in the 'Economics' forum...could do with some fresh opinions..!!
 
#18
Sod the bonus's, what about the amount of money RBS spemds on sponsoring the 6 Nations Rugby and all the other things.

That must run into millions a year.
 
#19
And it's money well spent.
 
#20
Jesus ****ing christ. How do you suggest they motivate their staff to get it out of the red if they don't offer them bonuses? If you want decent people, you have to pay competitive wages.
Not sure the high pay/decent staff correlation always applies. I'm fairly sure Lehman paid their staff handsomely and look what happened there.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top