Sean Quinn - whats the business view

smeharg

micosoft wrote: »

...
the facts show in this case he engaged in a systematic scheme to defraud the Irish Taxpayer of money that rightly belonged to the Irish People.

micosoft wrote: »

...
This was a deliberate fraud on anyone that insured their home or car with Quinn Insurance. And every single one of us will pay for this with the 2% levy on Insurance policies for the next 10 years.

micosoft wrote: »

...

Essentially any illegal activities that Sean Fitzpatrick allegedly may have committed (transfer of 70m loans to avoid audit) pale into insignificance to the sheer illegality of what Quinn allegedly committed before during and after (the after is what he is in trouble for now).

Let's stick to the facts please.

Sean Quinn has not been subject to any criminal investigation let alone criminal charges being brough against him.

The investigation into Sean Fitzpatrick is lot more serious than you seem to comprehend. It is alleged that he falsified the financial statements of a public company. The consequences of that are potentially far more reaching than what you are accusing Sean Quinn of.

Peterdalkey

smeharg wrote: »

Ryanair, Lidl, ALdi?

Exactly, well run by talented educated businessmen focussed in the markets they know.

JD Dublin

AS I sse it, Sean Quinn was a good businessman, although as you can see from other's assertions on here, he cut corners sometimes.

He gambled on making billions on Anglo's share price. He lost. Now he's fighting to keep some money.

I think to infer he has some sort of morals in this is to miss the point. The point is, he is motivated by money, the bank want to take most of his. He is going to fight that.

There is no question of right or wrong in Sean Quinn's mind. He is right and everyone else is wrong, end of story. That way he keeps his sanity, and justifies keeping some of his money.

However he is breaking the law, according to the High Court, and will end up in jail with his son.

For most Irish people up to this i.e before all the Anglo shennigans, they say 'fair play, the man made something for himself'. Now in 2012 the vast majority of people see him as a criminal IMHO, nothing more nothing less. He gambled, he lost. Now he has to pay. There's a Kenny Rogers song in there somewhere.

If you need to know anything more about this mess, then imagine what would have happenned if Sean Quinn had won this particular gamble. He'd now be 1 or 2 billion richer. Would we as the taxpayers be sharing that big win with Sean Quinn? ''Would we f^&k'' in the words of Jim Gogarty who started the ball rolling in the Flood Tribunal into planning matters in North County Dublin.

Pawwed Rig

JD Dublin wrote: »

AS I sse it, Sean Quinn was a good businessman, although as you can see from other's assertions on here, he cut corners sometimes.

There was a guy on Newstalk this morning who said that Anglo had nothing to do with Quinn Insurance going down the tube.
He pretty much said anyone who thinks Sean Quinn was a good businessman needs to think again. Quinn insurance was, he said, poorly managed, did not have adequate reserves, poor underwriting and were selling the products too cheaply. He said the company would have collapsed this year even without Anglo.

sandin

micosoft wrote: »

So you believe that a massive conspiracy exists consisting of the banking sector, our Judiciary, and legal system? To suggest that's far fetched would be an understatement. Is it possible that the reason that Sean is in so much trouble is because the facts show in this case he engaged in a systematic scheme to defraud the Irish Taxpayer of money that rightly belonged to the Irish People.




The only thing being undercovered is the reckless nature of Sean Quinn. Only this evening have we discovered the actual hole in Quinn Insurance is now €1.6 Billion. This was a deliberate fraud on anyone that insured their home or car with Quinn Insurance. And every single one of us will pay for this with the 2% levy on Insurance policies for the next 10 years.



What are you trying to say here? This was entirely in character for Quinn. What does "spread his vision" even mean in English. The man took punts in many markets. In many cases it worked out. But like any gambler you get found out in the end. The evidence is increasingly showing that for a very long period of time (from the mid nineties) that Quinn Insurance was being used as a piggy bank. There is real form here.



This is the heart of the lie. Neither Anglo or Fitzpatrick knew that Quinn has built up this massive shareholding in Anglo. The evidence for this is that Quinn used contracts for difference to build his stake. Neither Fitzpatrick (or Drumm the CEO) had any idea of what was happening and they DID NOT WANT THIS TO HAPPEN.

Furthermore Sean Quinn built up MASSIVE and I mean MASSIVE contracts for difference (CFD's) in Anglo Irish Bank using money he did not have. He then used other peoples money (Insurance reserves) to try to make this good.

Essentially any illegal activities that Sean Fitzpatrick allegedly may have committed (transfer of 70m loans to avoid audit) pale into insignificance to the sheer illegality of what Quinn allegedly committed before during and after (the after is what he is in trouble for now).

As an aside, reprehensible as Fitzpatrick was, this attempt to turn him into a bogeyman that singlehandedly drove Ireland into it's current state is as reprehensible as the "stab in the back" theory the Germans had. Simplistic nonsense used to support populist lies as espoused at the Cavan Rally and to avoid this nation looking critically at itself to understand why we failed so badly as a nation.



You seriously expect us to believe that Sean Quinn based an investment of billions based on high risk CFD's on a late late show? Seriously? Do you listen to your own words? Fitzpatrick had nothing to do with the build up of his stake in Anglo. As soon as they discover what Quinn was doing they tried to unwind it (in a separate case which Fitzpatrick is being brought to book for). Quinn made the Anglo Disaster and even bigger disaster.




Yes - he created some jobs. And in a part of the country where jobs were hard to come by. That's great but simply does not in any way mitigate the great wrongs he has committed with other peoples money.



I'm sorry for you too. He has freely and openly admitted to putting assets beyond the reach of the Irish People who own and run IRBC. He has admitted to this. There is no name to "clear" as even he accepts this. If you can't even grasp what your hero says what hope that you can make a judgement about the situation.



Your rambling interpretation of a Late Late Show you mean?

You want to know what I think? I think that it is people like you who are the heart and core of the problems we have in Ireland now. Despite stealing your money from your insurance premium to support his position you still support Quinn based on some "ah sure he created jobs in the border counties" line.

It's not the corrupt TD, the neighbour with the broken septic tank, the banker who lent too much money, the small business man who dumps rubbish in nature reserves, etc who are to blame for where we are. It's not even Fitzpatrick........

It's the "ordinary" Oirish voter who looks the other way because "ahh sure he sorts the roads/supports local businesses/creates jobs so we shouldn't question them". It's because the Irish Voter has proven time and again to let them away with it. With Democracy come consequences and we reaping the whirlwind of our desire to look the other way on the off chance we'll get something out of it.

Christ!!! :eek::eek::eek: Wow!!

btw - if you actually read my post properly, I'm just asking questions and making suggestions based on what is being sad in the newspapers and wanted to see what others in business are claiming.

Your diatribe (that is what it is) is uncalled for in this forum.

The facts are not known. Some facts are, buts there seems to be a lot that has not come out yet.

The 1.6bn hole is a max based on worst case scenario and is likely to be about €1bn - still a lot, but when you look at the quinn model, he goes into a market cheap and then gradually raises the rates so that overall it becomes profitable after 3/4 years (ryanair model). As the receivers pulled out of the UK without allowing for benefit of multi year policy increases and risk spreading, the losses have in exacberated.

You say that neither Fitzpatrick nor Dumm knew what Sean Quinn was doing - sorry, but Fitzpatrick and Drumm are the last 2 people on earth I would believe. Fitzpatrick went on to national TV and blatantly told 1million people that his bank was doing brilliantly - his deposits were up and the share price was recovering. EVERY SINGLE WORD WAS A BLATANT BARE FACED and CALCULATED LIE! - That is proven. So sorry, I will never believe a word of Sean Fitzpatrick or his inner circle.

Then you say I am to blame? eh - what planet are you on? - With that one stupid ridiculous statement, you lose any debate.

As I said (read my posts), keeping assets away from receivers is wrong (I state that), yes running from justice is wrong (I state that), but my overall impression is a lot of the media is one sided on this and it looks like you've swallowed the media line in its entirety without lookig to see if there is a balance. I just think that there is something fishy about the whole business and why such a diversified company / visionary leader suddenly gambles everythign on a single horse. Very possibly it was a change from the old guard (Sean snr) to the new guard (sons, daughthers & nephews), or possibly he was hoodwinked by Anglo.

No-where have I staed in anyway that Sean Quinn is right or that he is doing the right thing - in fcat quite the opposite. What I'd love to know, even from a learning perspective is why such a change from a profitable diversified business model to a one horse gamble?

JD Dublin

smeharg wrote: »

Let's stick to the facts please.

Sean Quinn has not been subject to any criminal investigation let alone criminal charges being brough against him.

The investigation into Sean Fitzpatrick is lot more serious than you seem to comprehend. It is alleged that he falsified the financial statements of a public company. The consequences of that are potentially far more reaching than what you are accusing Sean Quinn of.

Sean Quinn has not been subjected to any criminal charges, no. but then i'd say that it will take years for this to be ironed out, so he may still end up in court.

Now look, Sean Fitzpatrick is alleged to have falsified the accounts of Anglo. True. But all of the facts have not emerged from the Quinn Insurance debacle, so let take a calmer view here.

It appears to be common knowledge that the proper reserves were not kept. That is an offence under various laws.

No charges have been made in relation to the reserves in Quinn Insurance, but I think it's almost certain that when the receivers have done their work, there will indeed be charges against those responsible at the top of Quinn Insurance.

Do you accept that latter point - that there appears to have been wrongdoing in Quinn Insurance in relation to the reserves?

smeharg

Peterdalkey wrote: »

You are quite right, a child would never have got away with it. It is the notion that one could build an empire by predatory pricing and always being the cheapest that is childish or probably more accurately uneducated or to put it more pejoratively, ignorant.

smeharg wrote: »

Ryanair, Lidl, ALdi?

Peterdalkey wrote: »

Exactly, well run by talented educated businessmen focussed in the markets they know.

So it's okay to follow that kind of business model if you are (formally) educated?

Is there any particular level to which one should be educated or this dependent on how much less you charge than your competitors?

sandin

smeharg wrote: »

Ryanair, Lidl, ALdi?

Ryanair are not cheap - but they give the impression they are cheap. They had first mover advantage and got rid of unneccessary costs and this helped them build their cash reserves and they could use predatory pricing on selective routes to kill competition.

Lidl / Aldi are good value and like ryanair, strip a lot of unneccessary expense out of grocery shopping (choice, brands, large stores, loyalty cards, staff etc).

Quinn did this too and it seems to have worked in most markets. The UK insurance market was the next thing, but obviously other events took over.

Peterdalkey

smeharg wrote: »

So it's okay to follow that kind of business model if you are (formally) educated?

Is there any particular level to which one should be educated or this dependent on how much less you charge than your competitors?

At least enough to know what you are doing and what you should be doing. The same applies to airline pilots, bus drivers and even bankers etc.. not exactly rocket science, just plain old common sense!

BostonB

Peterdalkey wrote: »

.... Slightly off topic but it would be interesting to examine the educational background, school leaving age etc of the top 500 debt defaulters over the past 5 years in Ireland. Anecdotally, it would seem to me that early school leavers and those without any formal business or third level education are disproportionately represented.....

I think you'll find that a lot of successful self made people, especially with their own business, have little business or third level education. So you're trying to make an argument with a half story.

Not necessarily. The vast majority of the 234 U.S. billionaires whose education level is tracked by Forbes magazine through 1999 finished college; 100 have some form of advanced degree, but 41--that's 18%--never got their college diplomas and two never even finished high school

This is still true even in the age of Internet moguls. For every Jerry Yang, who dropped out of a Ph.D. program at Stanford University and now has net worth of $5.7 billion, there is a Larry Ellison, who dropped out of the University of Illinois and is now worth $47 billion. In fact, the average net worth of billionaires who dropped out of college, $9.4 billion, is more than double that of billionaires with Ph.D.s, $3.2 billion. Even if you factor out the world's richest man, Bill Gates, who left Harvard University and is now worth $60 billion, college dropouts are worth $5.3 billion on average, as compared to those who finished only bachelor's degrees, who are worth $2.9 billion. And what is true for billionaires holds equally for the garden-variety rich: According to a recent report from Cambridge, Mass.-based Forrester Reaseach, a full 20% of America's millionaires never even set foot in college.

http://www.forbes.com/2000/06/29/feat.html

BostonB

Peterdalkey wrote: »

At least enough to know what you are doing and what you should be doing. The same applies to airline pilots, bus drivers and even bankers etc.. not exactly rocket science, just plain old common sense!

Nice theory but the world doesn't work like that. See my post above.

Peterdalkey

BostonB wrote: »

I think you'll find that a lot of successful self made people, especially with their own business, have little business or third level education. So you're trying to make an argument with a half story.






http://www.forbes.com/2000/06/29/feat.html

#

You are absolutely right, silly me. We do need the data for the rest of the drop-outs and see how they are doing and how they rate by number and wealth versus the drop-out millionaires. I suspect they may be slightly more than half the story.

dod78

Peterdalkey wrote: »

Eh, where does the M3 go?

What's this got to do with it?? the M3 motorway stops in Kells Co Meath

Peterdalkey

dod78 wrote: »

What's this got to do with it?? the M3 motorway stops in Kells Co Meath

a dead end then!

smeharg

sandin wrote: »

Ryanair are not cheap - but they give the impression they are cheap. They had first mover advantage and got rid of unneccessary costs and this helped them build their cash reserves and they could use predatory pricing on selective routes to kill competition.

Lidl / Aldi are good value and like ryanair, strip a lot of unneccessary expense out of grocery shopping (choice, brands, large stores, loyalty cards, staff etc).

Quinn did this too and it seems to have worked in most markets. The UK insurance market was the next thing, but obviously other events took over.

Good point.

I never found Quinn Direct to be cheapest, come to think of it. I have got better car insurance prices form different companies, and the PI insurance quote I got from Quinn was off-the-wall.

Predatory pricing is not the same as being the cheapest. Predatory pricing implies deliberate below cost positioning, for the short-term, to gain market share. It's only sustainable so long as there's cash reserves to cover it. Being cheapest is only sustainable if your costs are also low (eg Lidl, Aldi).

It's been implied in this thread that Sean Quinn was able to sustain a predatory pricing model for 40 years funded by excessive borrowing, which is complete nonsense.

M three

Peterdalkey wrote: »

That investigation predated the internet by many years. I do however have some direct knowledge of the matter. Just because something is not in the wider public domain does not make it untrue.

Eh, where does the M3 go?

Well because you have nothing to back up your sweeping statements it is more than reasonable to assume you are making stuff up.

And what has the M3 motorway got to do with anything?

BostonB

dod78 wrote: »

What's this got to do with it?? the M3 motorway stops in Kells Co Meath

The M3 serves a lot of people in Meath which is the busiest section. I suspect those with a gripe about with it stopping in Kells and not being funded to Cavan would be those with a local Cavan interest. Some might suggest SQ actions aren't going to help get it funded any sooner.

sandin

just remember the deficiencies in the insurance company was after Quinn got involved with the gamble on Anglo.

Prior to this, he was running numerous very successful companies, employing thousands of people and getting rid of cartels in various industries. He had diversified into the UK and europe and whilst Ireland still was a very important market, the destruction of the market in Ireland would not have brought down the company due to his diversification.

The question remains unanswered - what makes an intelligent person who has diversified his business greatly suddenly gamble on one horse?

And so far no-one (not even myself:D) can answer this and this is the part that bugs me!

BostonB

People who take risks and succeed against the odds, often outreach themselves.

I read I think in Joe Simpson books about mountain climbing something along the lines that people stubborn and determined enough and with drive enough, to get to the top of mountains, achieve this by ignoring advice about what they can't do. Unfortunately there comes a point when this characteristic means they don't stop when they should and pay the price.

You could say it was simply greed. I suspect its probably more complicated than that.

Bobbyknock

sandin wrote: »

just remember the deficiencies in the insurance company was after Quinn got involved with the gamble on Anglo.

Prior to this, he was running numerous very successful companies, employing thousands of people and getting rid of cartels in various industries. He had diversified into the UK and europe and whilst Ireland still was a very important market, the destruction of the market in Ireland would not have brought down the company due to his diversification.

The question remains unanswered - what makes an intelligent person who has diversified his business greatly suddenly gamble on one horse?

And so far no-one (not even myself:D) can answer this and this is the part that bugs me!

The deficiencies in the insurance business certainly occurred during his ownership.
Why do you think the company was put into administration by the regulators?
As a result of Sean stripping the insurance business of much of its reserves (using the assets for his own personal use) and the downturn in the profitability of the business (common cycle for an insurance company - purpose of them being required to hold such large reserves), the company did not have sufficient assets to meet its liabilities.
There was no other option for the regulators.
Sean's decision to enter into the UK marketplace ("diversification") was a major factor in Quinn Insurance being placed into administration. The losses incurred as a result of its' expansion into the UK were huge.

I do not think you properly understand why Quinn Insurance was put into administration?

To answer your question, why he gambled so much on one horse?
Read his comments to the papers. There is no sinister plot at play here. He just made a massive school boy error.
He bought into the Anglo story and believed it was set to continue.

As it was a CFD trade he would only have had to place the margin initally (10% of the trade value). At the beginning this may only have been less than €100 million (out of an estimated €5billion wealth)but as his stake size increased and the losses on the trade mounted, the margin calls to the brokers would have been massive. He would have to cover 100% of the trade losses and would have been under severe pressure to pay these immediately with the large London investment banks he transacted with.

Once he placed the bet and it began to turn sour it was impossible for him to close down the CFD contracts. I am sure Quinn wanted to do this when he knew who was betting against him but to try and sell a 30% or even 15% stake in Anglo at the time would have been nigh on impossible (this is why Anglo had to intervene with the placement to the Maple 10 with provision of non-recourse finance).

Anglo had backed Sean throughout the years on his various expansive adventures and he obviously believed in this strategy by the Bank. Sean demonstrated he had an appetite for debt and had no problem amassing vast volumes of it. Remember that close to €200 million in debt still remained in Quinn Group after it was taken over by the Bank dating back to his dot com bets fiasco in the 90s.
His stock betting was not a one off and he had suffered huge losses previously.

To suggest he was "hoodwinked" into taking his Anglo position is ridiculous. He is a "controller" and his family in court freely admit this. He has no formal experience in market trading and clearly did not employ or listen to anyone who did. He made all the decisions as he thought he knew best.

I am not saying there is anything wrong with this but this is clearly the way he operated.

He demonstrated greed (like most Irish people at the time including myself) and decided he wanted to try and profit more from a bank he believed would continue to grow.

He betted with money he clearly did not have and when the bet started turning sour he doubled down (raised his stake from 15% to 30%). This is a standard play from a bad amateur gambler.

He obviously did not understand the markets and who he was playing against.
He did not understand Anglo and its overexposure to the Irish property market. There was a rising current of opinion from 2006 onwards that Anglo was heading for a pop if the property market stagnated. Plenty of Irish investors were concerned of this overheating but obviously nobody thought it could blow out as big as it did.

It is easy commentating with hindsight but Anglo did have the reputation of being the cowboy of the Irish banking market at this time and the most risky if things turned bad. Hedge funds had a field day in London when they knew Quinn was in the position he was with margin calls he was being forced to cover. They knew he didnt have the cash to cover the bet and profited off his predicament. This was part of the reason Anglo bailed him out. They believed these hedge funds were solely to blame for the stock price tanking. They refused to accept that Anglo was massively insolvent at this point.

Anglo should never have lent Quinn the cash he needed for his initial margin calls on the CFDs. It was a clear conflict of interest. Up to this point besides bad banking practices, Anglo had not really done anything wrong.
I think it should be noted that Quinn did saved himself €500million from the Anglo placement of his 15% of shares he could not fund to purchase.

It is hard to fathom how such a wealthy father had not provided for his family long before he did. From reading the papers it would appear that his kids do not own their own homes. They have significant mortgages to pay.
This must surely ilk him.

The fact he betted with cash he did not have and then used company money to try and prop up his gamble partly explains how he saw no wrong in placing Anglo assets out of their reach for his family's good.
He obviously has become delusional of what is right and wrong. He is too emotionally involved to make correct decisions.
Given his fall from grace this is understandable.

I do not think anyone would like to be in his shoes right now. To see his family loose everything, be sent to prison and be lambasted in the papers every day must be horrendous.

At the same time though his bets will have to be repaid by the Irish state and to clear them it means every citizen in Ireland (adult and child) forking up about €1,000 each. This is not inclusive of the levy on all insurance policies that we will incur in perpetuity.

Peterdalkey

Very cogently put paulfurlong. The same traits are manifest in the rest of the non insurance Quinn activities, borrow heavily and bull on until you get the result you want, ignoring all the experts and naysayers. Justify it by saying " that is they way I do business and I have always been successful". When you start to believe your own PR, the rot is never far behind. As many of us have learned, it is much much harder to manage a shrinking business that it is to handle a constantly growing one. The bigger the debt the greater the difficulty.

Well done great piece.

Nuttzz

The BBC do a nice run down of the facts around the Quinn debt here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-19063419

This bit stands out to me

Judge Kelly described the scheme he authorised as one of "mesmeric complexity" that "reeked of dishonesty and sharp practice"

PapaDragon

micosoft

Actually a fair point. Nobody disputes he had great business acumen.

Glad we agree on this point

Well. Wasn't he?

No he was'nt greedy he was a very ambitious individual who has made a mistake and now is suffering for it.

No he didn't. He took out the CFD's from other parties unbeknownst to Anglo. When he got into trouble because the CFD's were going south he approached Anglo and it was at that point the Maple arrangement was kicked off to bail out Quinn using Anglo money. He is not entirely responsible for Anglo going of a cliff but he made the situation far worse for Anglo and indeed the country.

I did say

But I do not believe he is responsible for the bust of Anglo.

another point we agree on

Well this is going straight into conspiracy theory. A conspiracy theory that does not even fit with the known facts. Timing does not support your theory (Quinn created the situation - Mapleport affair occurred BECAUSE of Quinn - why should they be punished for something Quinn created?). And how did you not notice that Fitzpatrick and two directors were arrested as well the other week? That's a stunning level of ignoring reality to suit your own agenda.

Who said I did not notice Fitzpatrick was arrested ? Come back to me when he is in jail.

Insurance levies were created by the long term (read from late nineties) underfunding of Quinn Insurance through excessive risk taking especially in the UK market. This is fact.

Wrong. Insurance levies were created as a result of Pmpa going bust in 1982. We were also paying 1% levy on insurance policies, and a pension levy. I suppose you want sean quinn to take the blame for all these levies too.

Complete speculation and conspiracy invention. Fitzpatrick has been charged after an extremely complex investigation.

Come back to me when he is in jail.

Quinn is the greedy developer!!! If a developer deliberately salted away money belonging to the tax payer and point blank refused to reverse this on front of a judge they too would be serving contempt. In any case I agree that this developers should be persued. It's just that I recognise Quinn as a fellow traveller and in fact one of the worst. Many "developers" created thousands of jobs too you know!

Pure waffle. I never said that these developers did'nt create jobs. There are plenty of developers going off to the uk for bankruptcy which is actually keeping assets beyond nama and the banks.

PapaDragon

Nuttzz wrote: »

The BBC do a nice run down of the facts around the Quinn debt here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-19063419

This bit stands out to me

Judge Kelly described the scheme he authorised as one of "mesmeric complexity" that "reeked of dishonesty and sharp practice"

This bit stands out to me :

It was a leveraged bet on the share price - if it his bet had come good, he would have made billions.

If that bet had come off we would all be having a completely different conversation about him now.

sandin

I think a lot of people are missing an important point here. Prior to 2007, Quinn only made good headlines. He was a media darling, he smashed cement making and glass making cartels and diversified his business so that he was no longer dependent on one economy or one part of an economy.

In 2007 he had plenty of reserves and there was no questions whatsoever about his borrowings which, whilst high, were well within corporate limits for a company of that size.

Then came 2007, and I still say I do not believe anything that comes from Fitzpatrick's mouth nor any of the inner Anglo circle and I do not believe that it came as a surprise to them that Sean Quinn was building a position in the bank - I would not be surprised if at some stage it came out that Sean Fitzpatrick was behind Quinn's CFD purchases (nope - no proof whatsoever, I just don;t trust Fitzpatrick in naything he says/does)

What we need to know that in 2007, the market was changing very very quickly. Land prices in particular were starting to collaspe and Anglo being the forerunners in land purchasing finance could see this a mile away and therefore, my theory is a plan was hatched and my question is did Fitzpatrick target Quinn with this plan as Quinn was both a large customer, and Fitzpatrick had a lot of direct and personal dealings with Quinn.

In fact, Quinn was the ONLY person that such a plan would work with as any other high net individuals did not have the same control over their empire that Quinn had and also the gamble needed deep pockets.


Personally, I think this angle needs to be checked out as everything and anything negative about Quinn including insurance reserves, losses etc only date from 2007 - before that he was the psoter boy of Irish industry and a trawl through any accounts prior to 2007 wouldn't show anything out of the ordinary.

btw - it quite obvious to most - I really really think Sean Fitzpatrick was the most culpable person in this recession and it is quite amazing that the media are still almost holding him in awe. But then he did give them tons of freebies trips in the good times and great parties too.

BostonB

Lots of people, developers, banks, even FF, Bertie etc only made good headlines before 2007.

Bobbyknock

sandin wrote: »

What we need to know that in 2007, the market was changing very very quickly. Land prices in particular were starting to collaspe and Anglo being the forerunners in land purchasing finance could see this a mile away and therefore, my theory is a plan was hatched and my question is did Fitzpatrick target Quinn with this plan as Quinn was both a large customer, and Fitzpatrick had a lot of direct and personal dealings with Quinn.

In fact, Quinn was the ONLY person that such a plan would work with as any other high net individuals did not have the same control over their empire that Quinn had and also the gamble needed deep pockets.

Please explain what plan Anglo/Sean Fitz had by Quinn taking a massive oversized CFD stake in Anglo which he could clearly not fund?

Having a major shareholder who has massively borrowed and is in a financially distressed position is of no benefit to anyone.

One of the most fundamental principles of share trading or gambling is don't bet what you can't afford to loose. He betted with company money and "clearly did not have sufficent reserves" to cover the potential losses. If he did we wouldn't be having this conversation.

The facts are simple. The gambler betted big and lost his shirt. There isn't anything more really to argue on the matter.

Sean Fizt led a bank with poor lending practices. They didn't do anything illegal. They simply provided a service that had a lot of demand.
We as a nation have to all take responsibility for what has happened. Yes maybe some are more responsible than others but we all played a part is some way or other. Blaming anyone directly for the mess does not resolve the problems or get us anywhere.

Anglo's error was in bailing out Quinn for his CFD exposure. This was a clear conflict of interest transaction and went against basic decent corporate goverance principles.
The big London brokerages should have been left to collect their debts directly from Quinn (by way of receivership of assets). Quinn would have lost everything a lot sooner this way and the Irish taxpayer wouldn't have taken such a huge hit on the Quinn debts but instead the big London brokerages would have had to share the burden.

smeharg

paulfurlong wrote: »

One of the most fundamental principles of share trading or gambling is don't bet what you can't afford to loose. He betted with company money and "clearly did not have sufficent reserves" to cover the potential losses. If he did we wouldn't be having this conversation.

The facts are simple. The gambler betted big and lost his shirt. There isn't anything more really to argue on the matter.

Very true. However, when Sean Quinn began investing in Anglo it was a blue chip stock. Where Sean Quinn went wrong (besides using an ultra high risk investment mechanism) was when the Anglo share price started to go south, instead of cutting his losses he invested more. Now that was either naive (to believe that the share price would recover) or plain stupid - probably both.

paulfurlong wrote: »

Sean Fizt led a bank with poor lending practices. They didn't do anything illegal. They simply provided a service that had a lot of demand.

We've still to find out if anything illegal went on. Sean Fitzpatrick wasn't disclosing directors loans from before all this went on.

paulfurlong wrote: »

Anglo's error was in bailing out Quinn for his CFD exposure. This was a clear conflict of interest transaction and went against basic decent corporate goverance principles.

It's more than a conflict of interest or poor corporate governance - it's illegal under the companies acts, which is what 3 former Anglo executives have been charged with.

paulfurlong wrote: »

The big London brokerages should have been left to collect their debts directly from Quinn (by way of receivership of assets). Quinn would have lost things a lot quicker this way and the Irish taxpayer wouldn't have been out of pocket for any Quinn debts.

That might have been a much cleaner exercise in the long run, but wouldn't have had the result that the Anglo board (and allegedly the Financial Regulator of the time) was looking for, ie a recovery of the share price. It was this scenario that Anglo was trying to avoid.

Sean Quinn wasn't bailed out by Anglo. He was burdoned with a mountain of debt that has ultimately bankrupted him. Anglo had one motive in that "deal" and it wasn't to bail out Sean Quinn. If it were to bail out Quinn he would've been given non-recourse loans (as was done with the Maple 10).

From what I understand, Quinn has been moving around money for quite some time now hiding it as best he can. This shows a lot of contempt for Ireland, and the general public, because he knows well the country is hurting now and he has been told not to do it. This alone demonstrates he is not an honest man, and doesn't really care about the irish public at all. That alone deserves prison time
He may have created jobs before but if anything, hiding all his money through various 'Berlusconiesque' schemes and corporate webs in various locations, its affecting the regular punter who is paying his extra taxes and stealth taxes, and reducing employment now. Silvio was prime minister and enacted laws whereby the things he was accused of were no longer crimes, or something to that effect. Fortunately Quinn isn't Taoiseach and he should pay for his crimes.
I also doubt it would be too speculative to assume that all of these jobs he created on the border counties had nothing to do with employment grants and tax breaks. That people think it was out of the goodness of his heart, is a bit naive i think. Yet while that could be considered good business what he has done there, I find it hard to see any other examples of his good performance as a businessman. Seems to be a lot of gambling in general

Bobbyknock

smeharg wrote: »

Sean Quinn wasn't bailed out by Anglo. He was burdoned with a mountain of debt that has ultimately bankrupted him. Anglo had one motive in that "deal" and it wasn't to bail out Sean Quinn. If it were to bail out Quinn he would've been given non-recourse loans (as was done with the Maple 10).

Are you serious when you say Sean Quinn was not bailed out by Anglo????? Where else was he going to get the billions he owed on his CFD accounts?

How exactly was he burdoned with the debt?
He sought and was provided with an out in preventing the CFD providers from closing in on him (through loans).
He had lost his bet and he had to cough up. If Anglo did not provide the loans he was most definitely finito. Anglo provided him with a stay of execution for him to try and turn things around. Unfortunately that did not transpire.

I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that it was inappropriate for Anglo to lend him the money to fund his losses. Of course they had their own motives in doing so. No one is suggesting otherwise.
This was a clear conflict of interest on their part and the courts should decide what are the consequences for such an action.

Both parties clearly acted under serious duress and stress. Both acted irrationally.