# Hold or cash in savings bond with An Post?



## yenom (17 Feb 2011)

I have 7 months left on a three year savings bond with An Post (€60,000). If I take out my money early I will lose about €3000.
There was a lot of doomsday situations going around over the last 2 years where people suggested to get your money out of the Irish System.
I realise no one has all the answers but I’m looking for some opinions whether I should cut my loses or stay the distance?


----------



## Bigmc (17 Feb 2011)

Hi yenom,

For what its worth id hold & wait out the term. €3000 is an awful lot of money to loose. An Post seems to be more secure than EBS, Anglo, INBS. Hold on & just keep a ear out for any changes coming down the track


----------



## kdoc (18 Feb 2011)

yenom said:


> I have 7 months left on a three year savings bond with An Post (€60,000). If I take out my money early I will lose about €3000.
> There was a lot of doomsday situations going around over the last 2 years where people suggested to get your money out of the Irish System.
> I realise no one has all the answers but I’m looking for some opinions whether I should cut my loses or stay the distance?


 
I'm in a similar position and it's difficult to know what to do. You may be very annoyed to lose €3 grand in interest, but to lose the whole €60 grand might cause you to have many sleepless nights. On the other hand, it's difficult to see the government (whoever that will be) wiping out the citizenry - and remember almost everyone has a few bob in the Post Office. Even allowing for pari passu, they would hopefully come up with a strategy to save depositors. If someone decides to screw An Post depositors it's unlikely they will ever see the inside of Leinster House again.  Yenom, I have 18 months to go on my term and I'll stick with it, at least for another while.


----------



## Guest105 (18 Feb 2011)

yenom said:


> I have 7 months left on a three year savings bond with An Post (€60,000). If I take out my money early I will lose about €3000.
> There was a lot of doomsday situations going around over the last 2 years where people suggested to get your money out of the Irish System.
> I realise no one has all the answers but I’m looking for some opinions whether I should cut my loses or stay the distance?


 

I think you should wait, 7 months isn't long to wait and €3000 is a lot of interest to lose.  Keep an eye on how things are going in the financial markets and if there are signs of something drastic about to happen move quickly to get it out.


----------



## oldtimer (18 Feb 2011)

I have a saving certificate which has 3 years to run and I am not panicking.


----------



## dockingtrade (18 Feb 2011)

yenom said:


> I have 7 months left on a three year savings bond with An Post (€60,000). If I take out my money early I will lose about €3000.
> There was a lot of doomsday situations going around over the last 2 years where people suggested to get your money out of the Irish System.
> I realise no one has all the answers but I’m looking for some opinions whether I should cut my loses or stay the distance?


 
i think your ok for 7 months I have 4 years left on one am am thinking alot about it. At the same time i cant see any savings incl p/o savings taking any kind of hit when our central bank is the ecb(thats another debate). But if you were to think the worst was going to happen and take the 3k hit what are you going to do with the money then?


----------



## Gatekeeper (19 Feb 2011)

i have a three year savings bond with on post too with about two and a half years to go.  Hard to know what the right thing is to do, and I have thought about taking out but what do you do with it then?  So for the moment I will leave it there and just keep an eye on the news and hope I am doing the right thing!  7 months is not too long to go.


----------



## sunnydonkey (19 Feb 2011)

If An Post were to default, that would mean that the State would have defaulted and before the State would have defaulted they would have left the Banks default, which would have crippled the big European banks, so it won't happen. So don't worry about An Post. By the way Germany just recently paid off  the money owing from its big default earlier in the last century.


----------



## Lightning (20 Feb 2011)

sunnydonkey said:


> it won't happen.



It can and might happen. 

Market experts, The Economist, FT, Gurdgiev, McWillams, the credit default swap market and other disagree with you. They all have said/implied that it can happen. 

The country and banks are insolvent/bankrupt, a sovereign default/debt restructure can and probably will eventually happen.


----------



## cheers2010 (21 Feb 2011)

I am planning to take out one of the 5.5 year savings bonds ... is this not advisable now? ... it's down on the 'best buy' list


----------



## horusd (21 Feb 2011)

cheers2010 said:


> I am planning to take out one of the 5.5 year savings bonds ... is this not advisable now? ... it's down on the 'best buy' list


 

If you read some of the comments above(and elsewhere on AAM & various other financial commentators & news sources) it might give you pause for thought. In a sense you are taking something of a punt on no sovereign Irish default.  Some people seem very sure it wont happen, others seem less certain. Given all the uncertainty I personally would hold off on such a long-term commitment of 5.5 yrs. You don't say how much you are intending on investing, but maybe the safer bet would be to spread it around various places to reduce risk.  You could look at opening a foreign bank A/C, or rabodirect,Danske bank (NIB),  etc.   I suggest you spend more time on research before you make a final decision.


----------



## Guest105 (21 Feb 2011)

Cheers2010 - I would pay thoughtful attention to  Ciaran T's post, he spelt out the current situation very clearly.


----------



## cheers2010 (21 Feb 2011)

I've about 20k. it's just sitting in a savings account. I'm more or less happy to lock away 10K for 5 years. I'm lazy ... hate reading up on it, but when I do, there is just so much to take in


----------



## frankmac (22 Feb 2011)

This is the reply I received from An Post

_Thank you for your enquiry._
_“State Savings™” is the brand name used by the National Treasury Management Agency (NTMA) to describe the range of savings products offered by the NTMA to personal savers._​_When you invest in “State Savings™” products you are placing your money directly with the Irish Government, under the management of the NTMA._​_Therefore, your money is 100% secure as the repayment is a direct obligation of the Irish Government._​
_Regards_

_State Savings_


Not really very encouraging is it?


----------



## callybags (22 Feb 2011)

> Not really very encouraging is it?


 
What wording would be encouraging?


----------



## frankmac (22 Feb 2011)

Ha. Good question. How about something like " even if the Irish Government defaults on its debts, your money will be 100% secure"


----------



## Lightning (22 Feb 2011)

frankmac said:


> This is the reply I received from An Post
> 
> _Thank you for your enquiry._
> 
> Therefore, your money is 100% secure as the repayment is a direct obligation of the Irish Government



This is a laughable reply for the wrong reasons.


----------



## kdoc (23 Feb 2011)

CiaranT said:


> This is a laughable reply for the wrong reasons.


 
Ciaran, it's somewhat better than the total lack of response to an email I sent to the Dept. of Finance regarding the implications for State Savings. Zilch.


----------



## frankmac (23 Feb 2011)

kdoc said:


> Ciaran, it's somewhat better than the total lack of response to an email I sent to the Dept. of Finance regarding the implications for State Savings. Zilch.


 

There goes my idea of emailing the Dept of Finance for clarification.


----------



## Vega (25 Feb 2011)

The email was probably received by a low level civil servant who may reply or not reply with no accountability either way so why would they bother?  In fact, now that I think about it, they'd think they'd be safer _not_ saying anything (that could later be held against them) at all.


----------



## oldtimer (25 Feb 2011)

Vega said:


> The email was probably received by a low level civil servant who may reply or not reply with no accountability either way so why would they bother? In fact, now that I think about it, they'd think they'd be safer _not_ saying anything (that could later be held against them) at all.


Absolutely correct. Did you expect to get a letter from the Head at the Dept giving you total assurance? The email was received by Customer Services who sent out their standard reply to such queries.


----------



## kdoc (25 Feb 2011)

oldtimer said:


> Absolutely correct. Did you expect to get a letter from the Head at the Dept giving you total assurance? The email was received by Customer Services who sent out their standard reply to such queries.


 
Actually, oldtimer, they didn't send any reply at all - no standard reply that you mention - nothing.
Now, I didn't expect a response from a departmental chief. And as every schoolboy (and AAM member) knows, there is no such thing as a totally 'risk free' financial product. However, an acknowledgement would have been nice, and better still, I would have liked like to hear what strategies, if any, are being considered to protect depositors. Maybe something along the lines of the protection afforded to Anglo and Nationwide depositors would be nice. Could that be regarded as a precedent?


----------



## oldtimer (26 Feb 2011)

kdoc said:


> Actually, oldtimer, they didn't send any reply at all - no standard reply that you mention - nothing.
> Now, I didn't expect a response from a departmental chief. And as every schoolboy (and AAM member) knows, there is no such thing as a totally 'risk free' financial product. However, an acknowledgement would have been nice, and better still, I would have liked like to hear what strategies, if any, are being considered to protect depositors. Maybe something along the lines of the protection afforded to Anglo and Nationwide depositors would be nice. Could that be regarded as a precedent?


I was not responding to you - more at the reply Frankmac received.


----------



## frankmac (28 Feb 2011)

Oldtimer I think you're a bit confused here. The request I made and the reply I received was from An Post not the Dept. kdoc was the one who emailed the Dept and was rightly ( in my opinion) annoyed not to have received even an acknowledgement.


----------



## Black Rock (23 May 2011)

*post ofice savings or NTMA savings*

The term _"Post Office Savings"_ is not as clear as it could be - if you check the published annual accounts of the post office (An Post) you will notice there is no statistics on "Post Office Savings" at all, as national savings do not form any part of the financial statements of An Post. 

The reason for this is that the post office provide a counter service to collect savings money on behalf of the Government and the post office immediately, every day, hand all savings money over to the Government under the management of the National Treasury Management Agency where it is known as "_NTMA State Savings_" which includes Prize Bonds.

NTMA State Savings are accounted for only in the annual accounts of the National Treasury Management Agency (NTMA) and are identified as being part of the national debt and under knownunder the name "NTMA State Savings". 

The NTMA's website StateSavings dot ie has a brochure on the home page which explains everything and lists the products which include Savings Bonds, Savings Certificates, Instalment Savings, Deposit Accounts (such as the Ordinary Deposit Account and the Deposit Account Plus) National Soldidarity Bond and Prize Bonds.


----------

