Persimmon Chief Exec £128m bonus

Kankerot said:
The selling of council homes was and still remains a reckless policy and extending it to HA is simply madness.

A considerable proportion of RTB stock has now been 'recycled' into the private rented sector, especially in recent years. The pace of growth of private renting in the RTB resale sector may affect the demographics, dynamics and stability of some neighbourhoods.

The resale of RTB property into private renting results in higher Housing Benefit expenditure. One study calculated that the higher cost of accommodation in the private rented sector in a local authority led to an additional cost of £3.2 million per annum compared to the equivalent in social renting.

On the basis of the available evidence it would be extremely hazardous to attempt even a broad estimate of the likely take-up of the extension of RTB to the housing association sector in the next five years. One would imagine that many tenants on the margins of purchase will be tempted to take it up if they can access the finance to do so, whether through formal mortgages or additional support from families or friends. But such judgements must remain speculative for now. There is an urgent need for some high level modelling about possible scenarios for the future pattern of RTB activity in the housing association sector

From a Parliamentary report.
Click to expand...


Sooooo.......


Build a shed load of "council housing".
Then what?
 
Sponsored Links
^woody^ said:
What are you saying then, that the government should not have helped people buy a new house, and not kept thousands of trades in employment because one particular company had a perfectly legal and private internal bonus scheme.

I'm sure all the new homeowners who have moved into their new home that they purchased from Persimmon or other companies, and trades people building those homes and paying their own mortgages would have a different view.

Please don't be such a drip.
Click to expand...

Levels of hypocrisy.

So lots of ways to answer this. So these tradesmen and companies benefited from state handouts in the form of a non interest bearing loan which subsidised the deposit on new homes so we can call them benefit scroungers - they got money for nothing. :mrgreen:

Looking at the effects of the policy what it did is not increase the supply of homes. It distorted the market because it was inflationary - housebuilders were charging a premium of upto 5% on these homes. All it has done is boosted the profits for the builders as the builder bears no risk whatsoever.

On top the lenders who provided mortgages did so at a premium so all this extra money that was pumped into the market was extracted by the builders and banks.

I take as a person in the building trade? you benefited by state intervention which you seem to object but not when it benefits you. You benefit scrounger!

I thought as a free marketeer you should let the market operate and find its own equilibrium.
 
Who are these council houses intended for then, and for how long are they likely to be tenanted by them?
 
Sponsored Links
Kankerot said:
Levels of hypocrisy.

So lots of ways to answer this. So these tradesmen and companies benefited from state handouts in the form of a non interest bearing loan which subsidised the deposit on new homes so we can call them benefit scroungers - they got money for nothing. :mrgreen:

Looking at the effects of the policy what it did is not increase the supply of homes. It distorted the market because it was inflationary - housebuilders were charging a premium of upto 5% on these homes. All it has done is boosted the profits for the builders as the builder bears no risk whatsoever.

On top the lenders who provided mortgages did so at a premium so all this extra money that was pumped into the market was extracted by the builders and banks.

I take as a person in the building trade? you benefited by state intervention which you seem to object but not when it benefits you. You benefit scrounger!

I thought as a free marketeer you should let the market operate and find its own equilibrium.
Click to expand...

And yet Persimmon's bonus scheme was in place two years prior to the Help to Buy scheme your are moaning about.

How bow da? :rolleyes:
 
^woody^ said:
And yet Persimmon's bonus scheme was in place two years prior to the Help to Buy scheme your are moaning about.

How bow da? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Lol, how about this.

The LTIP scheme was linked to the share price, which has since 2014 has soared, and translated to outsized bonuses.

To quote the FT

"The scheme rewarded how much much cash was returned to shareholders. The shares have risen from £6.57 when the LTIP was approved to £26.88 today which has been driven largely by the boost from the government’s Help to Buy equity loan scheme that has pumped up house prices and land values."
 
Kankerot said:
which has been driven largely by the boost from the government’s Help to Buy equity loan scheme that has pumped up house prices and land values."
Click to expand...
There you go; the conservatives do know what they are doing - just pretending to be doing something else.
 
Many things the goverment get involved in , with reference to subsidies is generally a mine field of red tape & overly complicated

they had a scheme many years ago where bye any one over 65 could get a £300 grant towards the cost of a new boiler

the scheme was (to be fair) simplistic the installer knocked £300 off of the price & got in reimbursed by the Government

trouble was they only got £250 back as the company administering it kept £50 for admin
 
Kankerot said:
Lol, how about this.

The LTIP scheme was linked to the share price, which has since 2014 has soared, and translated to outsized bonuses.

To quote the FT

"The scheme rewarded how much much cash was returned to shareholders. The shares have risen from £6.57 when the LTIP was approved to £26.88 today which has been driven largely by the boost from the government’s Help to Buy equity loan scheme that has pumped up house prices and land values."
Click to expand...

So what? The Persimmon bonus scheme was devised before the Help to Buy scheme and so had nothing to do with it.

What are are actually moaning about, as it looks like you are adding one and two and getting four.
 
^woody^ said:
So what? The Persimmon bonus scheme was devised before the Help to Buy scheme and so had nothing to do with it.

What are are actually moaning about, as it looks like you are adding one and two and getting four.
Click to expand...

So are you being intentionally obtuse?

Their remuneration package was tied to profits returned to shareholders which as pointed above was boosted by HTB which pumped up profits and land values.

Benefits scroungers. :rolleyes:
 
Kankerot said:
So are you being intentionally obtuse?

Their remuneration package was tied to profits returned to shareholders which as pointed above was boosted by HTB which pumped up profits and land values.

Benefits scroungers. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You'll be moaning about umbrella companies profiting from rainy days next, lawn mower companies benefiting from planning policies requiring gardens, and the connection between dentist profits and mint humbugs.

New tin hat for Christmas?
 
your examples are entirely different to the foolish scheme of a tax cut which has the effect of increasing house prices, thus making builders, vendors and estate agents richer, while failing to help the house buyers who politicians falsely claimed would be the beneficiaries.
 
Kankerot said:
Go on. Enlighten me what happens when more homes are built.
Click to expand...

There are more homes :whistle:

Who is the social housing intended for, and for how long are they expected to live in it?
Is social housing provision a solution, or a step towards some other goal / target / objective?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Sponsored Links
Back
Top