"Short Ireland!" - Lenihan ridiculed by international investors on Citigroup call

mike65

gollem_1975 wrote: »

tbh the 800 years reference was a joke on my part my apologies if it was in bad taste or just plain not funny.

fair enough

gollem_1975 wrote: »

but my point about the UK banks hand in the crisis still stands

I know it was just business but without a doubt the reckless lending ramped up another couple of notches as a result of increased competition in the Irish market with the entry of foreign banks.

thankfully we don't have to bail RBS, BOS, Northern Rock, Halifax et al out too.

I also stand by my view that certain elements of the english media do publish material about other countries to make their readership feel better about things that are happening in their own country. As an english person have you ever seen this trend or am I way off the mark ?

In the end of the day. Irish and UK press have the same objective.. sell newspapers.

I think the Irish are just (understandably) very prickly about what others think right now. You're all obsessed with what the neighbours think at the best of times! Now its hyper, that bastion of leftwing PC pro Irish thinking the Guardian is chock-a-block with articles and blogs like this one, Jay Leno features Brian Cowen looking drunk on his show, God knows what the Germans are saying on TV, radio and the www.boards.de type message boards.

gollem_1975

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

This was'nt Chatroulette, this was a busness meeting. How would you feel if you had a meeting with your bank manager and he openly mocked you while you were trying to renegotiate a loan?

lighten up will ya

Brian Lenihan has a thicker skin (you'd need to have it more than anything else to be in his game) than to be worried about being heckled by a few anonymous guys acting the eejit

now if a senior manager interrupted the call to say to one of these eejits, "smith see me in my office after this call" that would have been funny.

gollem_1975

mike65 wrote: »

fair enough



I think the Irish are just (understandably) very prickly about what others think right now. You're all obsessed with what the neighbours think at the best of times! Now its hyper, that bastion of leftwing PC pro Irish thinking the Guardian is chock-a-block with articles and blogs like this one, Jay Leno features Brian Cowen looking drunk on his show, God knows what the Germans are saying on TV, radio and the www.boards.de type message boards.

whats your opinion on this part of my post ?

I also stand by my view that certain elements of the english media do publish material about other countries to make their readership feel better about things that are happening in their own country. As an english person have you ever seen this trend or am I way off the mark ?

monkeypants

It just sounds to me like a really bad conference call. If the lines weren't muted, is as standard on such calls, then the background noise would have made the call completely unworkable. Who the hell was silly enough to set it up that way?

southsiderosie

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

They have right to disagree but their complete lack of respect for our MoF is a smack in the face to the country. They were taking part in the conference call in a professional capacity and should have conduced themselves in a more civilised manner. If I was their boss I would have sacked them for this carry on, it is no way to conduct business.

You've obviously never worked on a trading desk.

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

This was'nt Chatroulette, this was a busness meeting. How would you feel if you had a meeting with your bank manager and he openly mocked you while you were trying to renegotiate a loan?

IMO, traders and institutional investors would have been just as rude, if not more so, were this a corporation whose CFO kept trying to insist that things would be fine when they were bleeding revenue and customers.

The bottom line is that investors rely on accurate information in order to decide where to put their money. The Irish government has been fiddling with the debt figures and putting forth fanciful growth projections for months now; the recent ECB ruling on the bank liabilities debt made that clear. And the fact that Lenihan keep trying to say things aren't so bad out of one side of his mouth doesn't help. He is insulting the intelligence of anyone who has a basic grasp of public finance and/or can read a balance sheet.

loldog

southsiderosie wrote: »

He is insulting the intelligence of anyone who has a basic grasp of public finance and/or can read a balance sheet.

Intelligence? In the bankster industry? After having had to be bailed out to the tune of billions in scores of countries all over the world, I have a low opinion of the real intelligence of these hucksters and fraudsters.

Having to be bailed out by ordinary working people who are struggling to raise families, you would think they would have reflected somewhat on their own sense of self importance. Not a bit of it though, they're more insolent than ever.

If these guys were so sh*t hot and respectable, why do they need governments to step in to save their bonuses.

Get some perspective people. Banks have no compunction about repossessing your home if you can't balance your books, yet they face no real consequences at all when they screw things up completely for a fast buck...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqnHLDeedVg

gleep

loldog wrote: »

Intelligence? In the bankster industry? After having had to be bailed out to the tune of billions in scores of countries all over the world, I have a low opinion of the real intelligence of these hucksters and fraudsters.

Having to be bailed out by ordinary working people who are struggling to raise families , you would think they would have reflected somewhat on their own sense of self importance. Not a bit of it though, they're more insolent than ever.

If these guys were so sh*t hot and respectable, why do they need governments to step in to save their bonuses.

Get some perspective people. Banks have no compunction about repossessing your home if you can't balance your books, yet they face no real consequences at all when they screw things up completely for a fast buck...

The fact that they managed this con-job is a shining beacon of their intelligence. The fact that they can keep pulling it off is a shining beacon of how spineless and thick politicians are.

What they are doing is insanely immoral, but not without intelligence.

southsiderosie

loldog wrote: »

Intelligence? In the bankster industry? After having had to be bailed out to the tune of billions in scores of countries all over the world, I have a low opinion of the real intelligence of these hucksters and fraudsters.

Having to be bailed out by ordinary working people who are struggling to raise families, you would think they would have reflected somewhat on their own sense of self importance. Not a bit of it though, they're more insolent than ever.

If these guys were so sh*t hot and respectable, why do they need governments to step in to save their bonuses.

Get some perspective people. Banks have no compunction about repossessing your home if you can't balance your books, yet they face no real consequences at all when they screw things up completely for a fast buck...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqnHLDeedVg

When did I say anything about them being respectable? What I'm saying is that if they think someone is cooking the books, they will be savage.

In addition, not all banks needed a bailout, so let's not tar all of them with the same brush. Banco Santander is a good example; JP Morgan Chase another (the US government forced them to take TARP money).

The bottom line is banks want to make money. Some bankers do not mind taking down the entire financial system in their pursuit to make money, while others are more prudent. Much of this prudence comes from government regulation, which is why we are not hearing wild stories about bank bailouts in Canada or Spain. The Irish government chose not to regulate the banks; the Irish government sat by while the bubble grew and burst; the Irish government chose to shovel taxpayer money into bad banks like Anglo; and the Irish government is now choosing to extend the bank guarantee.

Just as banks will crack the whip against customers who get themselves into trouble and threaten their bottom line, governments can choose to crack the whip against entities that threaten the financial viability of the state. The banks did not make the Irish government choose saving bankers over saving workers. And now YOU are stuck with the bill.

I can't believe I am defending bankers, but in countries with well-regulated banking systems, you do not see these kinds of problems. And in countries with greater transparency in government matters and a good track record of being up front about the country's financial issues, you do not see the kind of raucous cat-calling that allegedly happened on the investor conference call.

kaymin

gollem_1975 wrote: »

:eek: yes and if the banks fail the government will have to stump up the money for this guarantee ! there isn't a reserve fund just waiting on the sidelines to pay out every depositor if a bank fails.

Like there's a reserve waiting in the sidelines for the much larger guarantee the government has committed us to?

gollem_1975 wrote: »

from where they are going to get the money to pay these depositors is anyones guess.. they won't be able to go to the bond holders because they'll have been burnt already.

Present and future taxpayers will pay for it. Bond holders aren't willing to lend to Ireland as it is - except at prohibitive interest rates.

gollem_1975 wrote: »

I'm feckin livid with what the bankers have done.

do you REALLY think it would be a good idea to let the banks fail ?

Yes - lenders will lend to those at a reasonable rate if they're a reasonable credit risk. If Ireland didn't bail out the banks then Ireland would still be a reasonable credit risk.

gollem_1975

Originally Posted by gollem_1975 wrote:

Well if you are a depositor in one of those institutions then I think you might know the answer to that question.

kaymin wrote: »

Yes, better off - you seem to forget the €100k government guarantee. The politicians ignore it aswell - part of the scaremongering tactics used to try to portray that their actions are for the good of Joe Citizen.

kaymin wrote: »

Like there's a reserve waiting in the sidelines for the much larger guarantee the government has committed us to?

I think you know the answer to that. the guarantee is there but the hope is that they will not be called on it ( my understanding is that even in normal operating conditions banks would not have the money to repay all their customers if they all wanted their money at once )

kaymin wrote: »

Present and future taxpayers will pay for it. Bond holders aren't willing to lend to Ireland as it is - except at prohibitive interest rates.

Aren't you are contradicting yourself.
bond holders ARE lending to us albeit at prohibitive interest rates. the taxpayers are paying for the interest on the money that has been borrowed.. the figure that I'm hearing is 1.5 billion a year. in comparison to the annual 19-22 billion deficit that 1.5 billion is manageable. its not as if the sky is falling in.
seeing the similarities between the guarantees and a confidence-trick is not particularly clever.. that is exactly what it is.. a gamble ( albeit a high stakes gamble) that they will never need to honour the guarantee.

kaymin wrote: »

Yes - lenders will lend to those at a reasonable rate if they're a reasonable credit risk. If Ireland didn't bail out the banks then Ireland would still be a reasonable credit risk.

phew.. have you got that in writing.. another view could be that if we burned these bond holders would anyone be willing to lend us money at ANY interest rate.. the truth is that you don't know the answer any more than I do.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

A Dub in Glasgo

Surely that should read "heads you win, tails we lose". Why was it perfectly rational?

BlaasForRafa

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Now if only we had laws in place that if they did that, they'd go in front of a firing squad...and I'm only being slightly facetious when I say that.

southsiderosie

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Now if only we had laws in place that if they did that, they'd go in front of a firing squad...and I'm only being slightly facetious when I say that.

I doubt anything that dramatic is necessary, but Canadian or Spanish-style banking laws might do the trick

Mr.Micro

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Of course the banks will lookout for themselves and their shareholders above patriotism, what is good for the country or even the decent thing..so long as the bank gets what it wants, money, profit and even survival in this case.

Since Lenihan/Government offered a bailout, the banks took it hand and all, and Lenihan failed or did he even try to exact any real conditions or get information, even the real extent of borrowing and exposure to other loans. He should have clobbered them when he had them on the ropes looking to be saved. The banks know that they are indispensable so they win win win and now are trying to stay private despite looking for more funds. Can they have it both ways......yes they can as this is Ireland where conventional rules do not apply.

kaymin

gollem_1975 wrote: »

I think you know the answer to that. the guarantee is there but the hope is that they will not be called on it ( my understanding is that even in normal operating conditions banks would not have the money to repay all their customers if they all wanted their money at once ) .

But the guarantee is being called upon - the banks are insolvent and Ireland is shoring them up pursuant to the guarantee provided.

gollem_1975 wrote: »

Aren't you are contradicting yourself.
bond holders ARE lending to us albeit at prohibitive interest rates. the taxpayers are paying for the interest on the money that has been borrowed.. the figure that I'm hearing is 1.5 billion a year. in comparison to the annual 19-22 billion deficit that 1.5 billion is manageable. its not as if the sky is falling in.

No - what we borrow from bondholders needs to be repaid - by present and future taxpayers. Well, the bank bailout is estimated to cost €50b* (no doubt that will turn out to be an underestimate) - if interest rates are 6.5% then the interest bill for the bank bailout is €3.25b p.a., or greater than 10% of our current tax take. I agree that the deficit is the bigger problem but we need to kickstart the economy to address the deficit (along with some cuts) yet we've just blown the reserves that would enable us to do that on the bank bailout.

*granted not all of this €50b is drawn down straightaway and therefore interest won't be incurred on the full amount initially, however, the existence of these government promissory notes are counted as part of Ireland's debt mountain.

gollem_1975 wrote: »

seeing the similarities between the guarantees and a confidence-trick is not particularly clever.. that is exactly what it is.. a gamble ( albeit a high stakes gamble) that they will never need to honour the guarantee.

phew.. have you got that in writing.. another view could be that if we burned these bond holders would anyone be willing to lend us money at ANY interest rate.. the truth is that you don't know the answer any more than I do.

Higher risk requires a higher return. There will always be investors willing to take a gamble at each risk level.

Sand

You know, eventually, were going to end up either in default or in service to the IMF and/or ECB who are already circling, eyeing up our corporate tax rate whilst licking their lips.

And even then, there are going to be some Stockholm Syndrome victims going "Alright, but how much worse would things have got if we had let the banks fail?"

round tower huntsman

we're a laughing stock. true irish patriots must be spinning in their graves at what gone on here,especially the last 15 yrs:mad::mad:

nuac

Any other source for the Citigroup conference story apart from the Daily Telegraph.

The DT is a fine newspaper, but rarely objective and truthful when dealing with Irish issues.

RATM

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

They have right to disagree but their complete lack of respect for our MoF is a smack in the face to the country.

C'mon ffs. Irish people have a complete lack of respect for the Dept. of Finance which we all know has been trying to hoodwink the public for over two years now. It's not at all surprising that the traders in Britain are deriding the principle architect of these mistruths and lies- Lenehan. They've heard enough, its just more rhetoric and hyperbole that comes out of his mouth time and time again and the markets have found him out yet he continues with his babble 'we have turned a corner' :rolleyes:

They were taking part in the conference call in a professional capacity and should have conduced themselves in a more civilised manner. If I was their boss I would have sacked them for this carry on, it is no way to conduct business.

this makes me laugh. Your average boss of a trading floor would be encouraging this type of behaviour to a hostile stakeholder, ie Lenehan. Trading room floors are full of macho gung ho behaviour, they recruit candidates specifically for these traits.

gollem_1975

kaymin wrote: »

But the guarantee is being called upon - the banks are insolvent and Ireland is shoring them up pursuant to the guarantee provided.




No - what we borrow from bondholders needs to be repaid - by present and future taxpayers. Well, the bank bailout is estimated to cost €50b* (no doubt that will turn out to be an underestimate) - if interest rates are 6.5% then the interest bill for the bank bailout is €3.25b p.a., or greater than 10% of our current tax take. I agree that the deficit is the bigger problem but we need to kickstart the economy to address the deficit (along with some cuts) yet we've just blown the reserves that would enable us to do that on the bank bailout.

*granted not all of this €50b is drawn down straightaway and therefore interest won't be incurred on the full amount initially, however, the existence of these government promissory notes are counted as part of Ireland's debt mountain.




Higher risk requires a higher return. There will always be investors willing to take a gamble at each risk level.

how did we get here from you challenging my point that if you (not you personally ) were a depositor you would not think it a good idea to let the banks fail.

I'm not saying that this is a good situation we are in.. but admittedly the 1.5bn p.a figure which I've heard being mentioned ( and I'm sticking to it until I hear otherwise ) is as we both agree much more manageable that the 19-22bn deficit that currently faces the country.

Also remember that the banks owe significantly more to their depositors (including a large proportion of Irish citizens) than they do to bondholders.

the government rightly know that if the depositors get spooked or if the depositors can't get their money it is going to be "time to crack open skulls and feast on the goo inside ken" ( Simpsons reference )

gollem_1975

nuac wrote: »

Any other source for the Citigroup conference story apart from the Daily Telegraph.

The DT is a fine newspaper, but rarely objective and truthful when dealing with Irish issues.

cool, I thought for a second I was the only person who noticed that..

silverstrand

gollem_1975 wrote: »

tbh the 800 years reference was a joke on my part my apologies if it was in bad taste or just plain not funny.

but my point about the UK banks hand in the crisis still stands

I know it was just business but without a doubt the reckless lending ramped up another couple of notches as a result of increased competition in the Irish market with the entry of foreign banks.

thankfully we don't have to bail RBS, BOS, Northern Rock, Halifax et al out too.

I also stand by my view that certain elements of the english media do publish material about other countries to make their readership feel better about things that are happening in their own country. As an english person have you ever seen this trend or am I way off the mark ?

In the end of the day. Irish and UK press have the same objective.. sell newspapers.

And it has nothing to do with the FF party and their notion of Politics as cult like obsession with the 'Party'. The country was an nothing more than a financial hunting ground for the 'party'.

If it bizarre to us how is it so hard to understand that it might just be as off to them. They have no vested media or teams of game players rubbishing any criticism as we have had to put up with. Where praytell are all the people who told Mr. Lenihan what a great job and how wonderfull Ireland dealing with things. Disappeared then. We have no trouble seeing the faults of US and Uk. In this case who can blame them for see our clangers.

There have been well made arguments on not going down the road of filling the Anglo gang with Irelands money. Made by most economists and the other Political parties. A scam is a scam and Ireland and its people are by products of it all. We can forget about the naughty english for a while, given what we allowed in less than a hundred years.

What we have to figure out is how we allowed it to go ahead without doing anything even remotely able.

Sticky_Fingers

RATM wrote: »

this makes me laugh. Your average boss of a trading floor would be encouraging this type of behaviour to a hostile stakeholder, ie Lenehan. Trading room floors are full of macho gung ho behaviour, they recruit candidates specifically for these traits.

Many would contend that its this macho gung ho bullsh!t that has led the world to the current state of affairs, I for one do not see it as a virtue:(. I have no firsthand experience in the world of finance though in my field of expertise my work and findings are routinely subjected to the most severe analysis and at times whithering criticism. During this time I have never experienced personal abuse or such unprofessional behavior shown by these investors, I am allowed to present my case and then others are allowed to eviscerate my work.

What I take issue with is that these people who apparently hold this nations future in their hands are acting like petulant schoolchildren who are encouraged and rewarded for this type of arrogant behavior. You may find my response naive and over sensitive but for many people like me who are outsiders to this financial world we are left wondering why should we continue to fork out billions in order to protect these peoples investments.

southsiderosie

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Many would contend that its this macho gung ho bullsh!t that has led the world to the current state of affairs, I for one do not see it as a virtue:(. I have no firsthand experience in the world of finance though in my field of expertise my work and findings are routinely subjected to the most severe analysis and at times whithering criticism. During this time I have never experienced personal abuse or such unprofessional behavior shown by these investors, I am allowed to present my case and then others are allowed to eviscerate my work.

Like I said, it is the nature of the beast in finance, and always has been. I worked on a trading desk 12 years ago, and the traders were definitely brutal, but they respected you if you made money. And the public finance guys are used to government ministers trying to blow smoke, but honestly Ireland takes the cake. Personally I think it's sad that investors are more willing to challenge the government when their money is on the line than the public is (because whose money do they think the government is playing with?), but oh well.

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

What I take issue with is that these people who apparently hold this nations future in their hands are acting like petulant schoolchildren who are encouraged and rewarded for this type of arrogant behavior. You may find my response naive and over sensitive but for many people like me who are outsiders to this financial world we are left wondering why should we continue to fork out billions in order to protect these peoples investments.

The investors in this case are the ones who would be buying Ireland's sovereign debt - i.e. the ones whose willingness to buy keeps the country running. If anyone has engaged in arrogant behavior it has been the government: they have not disclosed the full details of how they settled on the bank guarantee, they were caught fudging the numbers on its liabilities, and their only response to the public is basically "trust us". Just because a large number of Irish voters buy this claptrap doesn't mean foreign investors will.

I mean really: Bertie Ahern told people who dared to question the direction of the economy that they should just kill themselves. How arrogant is that? Brian Cowen shows up for an important address to the nation - one of the very few he has done as taoiseach - having obviously been out burning the midnight oil. How arrogant is that? The government issues a ridiculous job report claiming that they 'have a plan' for 300K jobs. That foolishness was the height of arrogance; do they think we are all stupid?

Finally, Lenihan wouldn't have to prostate himself before investors if he and his party had managed the country's finances properly over the last 10 years. Asking someone to buy several million dollars of your sovereign debt and expecting them to show any kind of deference to you is delusional and, to use your word, arrogant.

mike65

Just talking about this on RTE, sounds like a rather "larky" conference call.