Do you ever feel your giong to be conned ,we buy RBS It loses 5-6 bln O and the top boy's still get thier 5 mlns worth bonuses and now its nearly ready to go back to the private sector,Hey and I suppose it will go cheap because its a bit of a loser,and suprise suprise it will turn a right old profit.Dont it just make you feel peachy.
RBS
- Thread starter Harbourwoodwork
- Start date
Sponsored Links
When we bought the banks, we did so to rescue them, to make them successful again.
Now certainly we should have used our controlling share to influence the level of bonuses, and their ties to performance (as a shareholder, not as a government).
But stopping bonuses would be dumb, all the talent would just walk and we would be left with a failing bank, cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Now certainly we should have used our controlling share to influence the level of bonuses, and their ties to performance (as a shareholder, not as a government).
But stopping bonuses would be dumb, all the talent would just walk and we would be left with a failing bank, cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Sponsored Links
I`m with RBS
yeh so am I now
J
joinerjohn
So these idiots who got paid bonuses for losing the bank money,,,, You think the bank can really do with them? I thought the bonuses were there for the people who turned in a profit, not for losers. The banks don't care when all they have to do, is approach the government to hand them millions of taxpayers pounds. Shareholders too don't seem too bothered, just as long as they get their dividends each year.
Sorry to disagree Aron, but if the standard of investment bankers they attract, is such that the bank loses billions, then the banks have only themselves to blame.
But stopping bonuses would be dumb, all the talent would just walk and we would be left with a failing bank, cutting off your nose to spite your face.[/quote]
where would they go,my thinking if there all in the 5hite then there isnt anywhere for them.how on earth are they entitled to vast bonuses when they are losing HUGE amounts of money.
ask yourself truthfully,if you are in business and its making a loss would you still pay any of your workers a bonus,i think not.
hsbc=hongkong and shanghai banking corporation.
where would they go,my thinking if there all in the 5hite then there isnt anywhere for them.how on earth are they entitled to vast bonuses when they are losing HUGE amounts of money.
ask yourself truthfully,if you are in business and its making a loss would you still pay any of your workers a bonus,i think not.
hsbc=hongkong and shanghai banking corporation.
It's hard to take any of that twaddle seriously when you don't even know which banks were bailed out. HSBC was one of the few banks that didn't need any state aid.
B
Big Tone
My rather simplistic gripe is one of having to use a bank at all. I think it was back in 1977 I was told you’re not having a wage packet anymore, so you will have to open a bank account. And look where we are today with something which was foisted upon us without a single vote from the public in favour of them.
If you want an ethical bank you could always use Smile, owned by The Co-operative. If your focus, or obsession, is getting every last bonus and interest on your money then try Santander, which are hard to beat.
But beware, you know what they say about when something sounds too good to be true. No such thing as a free lunch, an' all that...
If you want an ethical bank you could always use Smile, owned by The Co-operative. If your focus, or obsession, is getting every last bonus and interest on your money then try Santander, which are hard to beat.
But beware, you know what they say about when something sounds too good to be true.
No such thing as a free lunch, an' all that...fair play to the name but I don't know about twaddle neither do you.
Banking is made up of many different sectors and departments, and individuals, it's a bit simplistic to argue all the bankers where to blame and none of them perform well.
Well that's an argument for not bailing them out, not cutting bonuses of existing workers based on prior and not current performance.
Certainly as shareholders we should be taking stock of bonuses and make sure they are paid to those who perform, but this whole "all the bankers are bad and don't deserve bonuses" is great for the Sun headline, not so much for clear headed policy.
Thanks for answering your own question.
Banking is global, plenty of places for the big boys to go, and it's all about confidence as well, we needed people to have faith in the banks we took over, business would hardly have faith in a bank that starts getting meddled by government for ideological not business reasons, I mean would you buy shares in such a bank?
In an ideal world the government could as shareholders tighten up bonus related to performance, but since governments are by nature clumsy and inefficient, they would inevitably **** that up, but then that's another argument for letting the banks fail, not bailing them out.
Sponsored Links
