If someone founded a new lending bank, would you support it

I am sure you will find plenty of prospective borrowers . However you may find it a lot harder to get depositors.
 
To be honest Sunrock, that isn't the basis for the bank.
Despite "Darwinian" comments in this thread, we need to help people to get going again.
If the existing banks cannot or will not do it, we need an institution that will be able to shoulder that load, a little at a time.

ONQ.
 
Well, exactly. As a social democrat I appreciate that the capitalist system can work well in some circumstances to leverage the competitive spirit of humans as a great generator of wealth. In other circumstances, it simply leads to monopolies which are far worse than any state monopoly since theyare unrestrained by any sense of social responsibility.

Its their broader lack of moral sense that is their most toxic aspect.
As corporations they have been given rights similar to a corporeal human.
As entities go they do not have the characteristics of ordinary human beings.

There are obvious implications in this.

ONQ.
 
I appreciate your intentions ONQ, but I feel you are misguided.
First of all what is credit? Well it is other peoples savings.
We have accessed these savings during the boom times when credit was easy.
Now we have huge personal debt and government debt and bankrupt banks which owe billions.
Now that there is a recession and much reduced demand for all goods and services, you feel that the banks should turn on the credit tap again to stimulate the economy.
You may think that credit is at the discretion of the bankers but the banks are dependant on foreign lenders for the money and these lenders are imposing stricter conditions.The money the banks got from the government is not for the purpose of lending but for NAMA which is to try to cover them for their losses to developers.
What type of enterprises do you think should get credit. We have a massive oversupply of most buisnesses to serve a market with much reduced spending power.
If there was a good and viable buisness that had serious potential....maybe an exporting company that had a product with strong demand...I am sure that company would be able to get the required credit.
 
I appreciate your intentions ONQ, but I feel you are misguided.
First of all what is credit? Well it is other peoples savings.
We have accessed these savings during the boom times when credit was easy.
Now we have huge personal debt and government debt and bankrupt banks which owe billions.
Now that there is a recession and much reduced demand for all goods and services, you feel that the banks should turn on the credit tap again to stimulate the economy.
You may think that credit is at the discretion of the bankers but the banks are dependant on foreign lenders for the money and these lenders are imposing stricter conditions.The money the banks got from the government is not for the purpose of lending but for NAMA which is to try to cover them for their losses to developers.
What type of enterprises do you think should get credit. We have a massive oversupply of most buisnesses to serve a market with much reduced spending power.
If there was a good and viable buisness that had serious potential....maybe an exporting company that had a product with strong demand...I am sure that company would be able to get the required credit.

==========================================================

Really Sunrock, Darwinian Economics do us little credit when we're trying to salvage and economy.
We need liquidity, common sense and cop on.
Here's some of mine for you.


Q. From Where or Whom do Banks get the Money they lend: A. its Magic:

Most of it is not from the deposits they take in.
If they were so limited they could only lend a percentage of this to cater for the time you might want to withdraw some of your own money.

Nowadays banks operate on the Fractional Reserve Banking System.
Banks with a deposit of say €100,000,000, are allowed lend a multiple of this, say 10 times or so or €1,000,000,000
The money they "lend" to you is virtual money, created by keyboard entry in your account and regulated by laws and agreements.


Q. How Do Banks Make Money: A. Lending:

They don't make their money by investing deposits, or else they'd be making very little with the current low interest rates.

One way Banks may a profit, even in a recession, is to screw money out of the population they say they are "serving".
When times get bad, like they are now, they lend less to fewer borrowers [the safest bets] and charge them higher interest to make up the difference.

Businesses go to the wall - the banks stay safe.
"Its the market", they blithely say.
It isn't - its the Banks.

Look at the difference between the interest rates the banks pay and lend at.

You can see the people on the edge of the game, the foreign exchange offices in every tourist resort.
People get annoyed when they're down to their last 100 EURO and they see the exchanges marking up the deal a couple of percentage points.

Look at the difference between what Banks can buy money at and what they lend at - even to regular customers who have excellent credit rating.
They take several percentage points over the current exchange rate, claiming: " it must be done - its risky to lend to people..."

Firstly, its not that risky.
Secondly, that's why insurance was invented.

That's doesn't stop Banks taking two cuts of the pie on every loan - don't believe me?
Have you ever taken out an insurance policy in case of default on a loan you took out and seen the interest rate they're charging you fall?
Me neither.

But lending and charging interest on the loan is not where Banks make their Billions.
It only seems like that to the little people, who use their Bank to borrow from as opposed to do business through.
Lending is actually only the icing on the cake.



Q. How Do Banks REALLY Make Money: A. Transaction Charges:

The big boys, the multinational corporations and the like, carry out thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousand or small transactions every day.
Every time a Bank does something to an account, there's a little thing called a transaction charge, charged to the account, or to a charging account.
These are micro-payments in relative terms, but over the course of a trading year for a multi-national they can run into billions.

Think of writing a cheque, the OLD way of doing business.
Physical paper gets collected and sorted and accounts get processed and debited.
The Banks had to pay people to do this and decided they weren't paying out of their annual profits - transaction charges would do instead.
Even after the introduction of Credit Cards and Virtual Direct Debits and Inter Account Transactions and 24-hour Banking - those charges still remain.

For giant corporations, able to shift their money and beggar countries, their leverage allows them to negotiate better rates.
But they still get charged by the Banks for doing similar things - moving and clearing money on a scale so vast we cannot imagine it.
One corporate clearing house is suggested to have cleared over 30 Billion one year - one year, one of the firms - and all of those Billions were charged for.

Transaction Charges: remember this.



Q. No, Seriously How Do Banks REALLY, REALLY Make Money: A. Black Magic:

No one really knows the extent of this, probably not even the Banks, but there is a market between Banks called the Inter Bank Market.
Banks Trade with Banks and with virtual corporations, specially constructed to undertake these trades.
These trades happen 24/7/365 using advanced instruments of trade.

Hedge Fund, Credit Default Swaps, Derivatives - we hear only about the common-or-garden varieties of trading instruments.
There are others, with more being invented all the time by people whose grasp of mathematics, probability theorem, International law and corporation law makes the people who invented Fractional Reserve Banking look like mere Apprentices.

But even leaving the derivatives Market in the hands of the like of Walls Street and the London Stock Exchange is like handing the keys of the Worlds nuclear weapons arsenal to HAL the super-computer from 2001@ A Space Odyssey.
Look at the Nama-ization of Bank Loans, less than 60 Billion and we're wetting ourselves over how we'll pay for it going forward.
Anglo Irish had over 210 BILLION EURO of Derivatives on its loan book.

210 BILLION EURO.

How much?

210 BILLION EURO

One Bank.

Brendan published the end of year Report from Anglo a while back and I pointed this figure out to him.
He corrected me assuming this like all the other columns was denominated in Millions.
I went and checked and found it was denominated in Thousands of Millions.
Billions - 217 of them or so If I recall correctly - from just one Bank.

Let me tell you Sunrock, I'm not the one who's misguided.
I'm the one who has started looking at this seriously last year and who's begun to see what's going on.
When I say we need a bank to lend money and not take deposits - apart from the initial deposit - I don't need Darwinian Economics and 1st principle reasoning.

We need this Bank because it will be able to lend from the get-go without having to worry about reaching an arbitrary Capital Reserve Ratio.
This is the 1 to 10 ratio mentioned above as an example that is the actuarial rule-of-thumb for fractional reserve banking.
Banks that don't reach this ratio are technically Bankrupt in Banking terms because they cannot lend.

This means they cannot lend to themselves, cannot make REAL money, cannot therefore PROSPER.
The biggest customer of this Bank may be the Banks themselves.

We need liquidity.
The Banks need liquidity.
And we all need to take a hard look at the Banking Systems because its out of control.

ONQ.
 
great stuff, set up your bank so best of luck at setting it up and very interested to how such a 'small' bank will be able to offer competitive rates and returns considering the few transactions it will be undertaking. Also very interested to see which banks your new bank will be able to borrow from in order to achieve the multiple of 10 you mention.
 
great stuff, set up your bank so best of luck at setting it up and very interested to how such a 'small' bank will be able to offer competitive rates and returns considering the few transactions it will be undertaking. Also very interested to see which banks your new bank will be able to borrow from in order to achieve the multiple of 10 you mention.

I note you're not denying any of the above information jack2009.
Profitability of THIS bank isn't an issue - its intended to service a ravaged economy, not screw it.
The multiple of 10 stems from the initial [probably Government, as discussed above] deposit amount.

ONQ.
 
There is a new bank starting in England. It was on the BBC this morning. It sounded just like what you'd dream about having as a bank. A customer focused bank. The day one opens in Ireland I'll be first in the queue. Until then I settle for the bank I have.
 
I note you're not denying any of the above information jack2009.
Profitability of THIS bank isn't an issue - its intended to service a ravaged economy, not screw it.
The multiple of 10 stems from the initial [probably Government, as discussed above] deposit amount.

ONQ.

Still think you will have a hard time offering competative rates. No point argueing with your quotes as they are quite selective and you have a long way to go before you hit the ground with the idea. Very much blue sky at the moment.

Who will invest in your bank if there is not a return.

I would not call banks who make money by playing margins and charging for fees as "screwing" as I grew up and appreciate that there is no such thing as a free lunch.
 
There is a new bank starting in England. It was on the BBC this morning. It sounded just like what you'd dream about having as a bank. A customer focused bank. The day one opens in Ireland I'll be first in the queue. Until then I settle for the bank I have.

Is that the American guy who used to have the majority stake in some US chain, before they were bought out? I remember reading about this last year.

Ireland's main problem is that it is a very small economy, and there's only so many banks that can operate profitably. Just look at all the UK banks pulling out, as their Irish operations weren't deemed good enough to warant the capital required. However, they all suffered from "Anglo" syndrome by following them. "Look at the insane profits they're making....let's do what they're doing". Shareholders wanted similar numbers to Anglo....unfortunately for them (and me to a little extent!!) other banks numbers are still a bit close to Anglos..in the wrong direction!

I have anicdotal stories from colleagues in business banking etc, and have heard some interesting stories of SMEs looking for money, but literally having a business plan on a page. I strongly agree that the more professionally run businesses have a better chance of obtaining credit. I can't comment from my own experiance, I only deal with (very) large institutions so have no exposure to SMEs.

A new bank would be interesting, but I can't see it being a player in Ireland for many many years (no branch network etc). But I'd love to see someone try.
 
Well ONQ it looks like I`ve really got you going!
You are quite right about the problem being liquidity. I am sure many people every weekend at pub closing time have that problem in that they have run out of cash.
I presume you will tell me that buisnesses with liquidity problems are solvent so liquidity is the only problem. That may well be , but bankers are not stupid and they in their wisdom have decided to curtail lending because the banks have only so much to lend and secondly the banks know that in a contracting market,a certain amount of these buisnesses will fail anyway so it is a risky lend.
Take a town with 10 hairdressers all having a liquidity problem and all claiming to be solvent.Well they are not doing as much buisness so some will have to close down or reduce in size. This may be darwinism in action as you say but in a contracting market if you were a bank you would bide your time and wait for the shake out and then might lend to the "winners" in what looks like a viable buisness.
That is assuming the bank had the money to lend.
The irish banks have to borrow abroad for their money and are part owned by the government who themselves are borrowing 500million a week just to keep going.
When the banks and the government go looking for this money ,as i said strict conditions are imposed...that is why we had all these cutbacks and more to come, otherwise we would lose our credit rating and would find it harder to borrow....
The banks in their turn are getting money from the government and more strict conditions.
I `ll ask you a question...if the government own the banks and the banks aren`t lending , who is making that decision? After all the government can`t very well say they are telling the banks not to lend to small buisnesses..it wouldn`t be politically popular. The banks hands are tied in that they actually haven`t got the actual money to lend anyway. The salaries and pensions are still very good however, thank you very much ,for the top managers , who are now dependant on the government , and these bankers know who their new paymasters are, so they are not going to rock the boat with loose lending.
You seem to believe that because of fractional reserve banking and various financial instruments the banks can lend 10 times their deposits or even more but this is not possible for the irish banks. First the government cannot print money so that is excluded.And the irish banks aren`t selling financial instruments that foreigners are buying as far as i am aware.
It is only countries with their own currency can do that. Secondly the Irish banks have to borrow money from abroad and from the government and have to toe the line as regards lending etc That is why the government have put their own people on the banks management.
 
Sunrock,

Much as I hate to quote McWilliams on anything, he got one thing right.
If we don't take charge of our own financial destiny, we can kiss our collective asses goodbye.
The fractional reserve limit was put in place to stop disasters happening to the bank.
I have some news for the banks - the disaster has happened and their slavish adherence to a standard is holidng us all back.

The fractional reserve limit was a prudent limit, not an absolute limit.
The reason the banks cannot lend is that they are nowhere near this arbitrary but prudent ratio limit.

We effectively have the worst of both worlds:
A single currency, limiting our financial instruments yet without real Europe-wide banking facilities.

You OTOH, appear to have gone beyond teh Headland of Financial Darwinism deep into The Land of the Self-Fulfilling Prophecy.
Believe Ireland Inc will default - lend it less at higher rates - and it will default.

Here, see how the yanks are dealing with it on their side of the Atlantic.
http://seekingalpha.com/article/194487-the-growing-movement-for-publicly-owned-banks?

ONQ.
 
Onq
You now also suggest abandoning the euro so we can devise financial instruments to to get us out of a hole. You have rowed in behind Mcwilliams , whose motives are unclear despite his absolute craving for popularity.Without the euro we would be in a very sorry mess and financial discipline would have meant that our currency would be very volatile and seriously devalued meaning much reduced spending power .Our ability to borrow abroad would be impared as we would have much higher rates.
The government has made transparent cuts while still retaining the benefits of the euro.
I don`t know much about the fractional reserve limits or what ratio of deposits to money market money our banks had , but I assume that with "self Regulation" that it was totally ignored.
Anyway it had or has nothing to do with why the banks won`t lend. Granted they can`t lend what they haven`t got, and even if they had they wouldn`t lend to bad risks and in this downturn , most loans to struggling buisnesses which need credit to survive are very high risk.This is especially the case when there are many buisnesses serving a shrinking market.
There is nothing to stop you going to a bank in the U.K. or Germany and asking for a loan there. Of course I doubt if you will get any joy as news of Ireland has spread worldwide. However if you were a viable multinational operating in Ireland I`m sure they would be accomadated.
You seem obsessed with "darwinism" as if it was a bad thing. The term has no moral compass....it just describes the way animals evolve in the natural world. It is the same with buisness. We are now in a situation where there is now less money in the economy after our recent credit fuelled boom has ended. The government officials are not going to "interfere " by going into every town and saying for example ...this town only needs only 5 hairdressers instead of 12, or this town is now only big enough for 3 chippers instead of 6.If anything else our politicians don`t like to pose besides closing down buisnesses. Instead they will let the failing buisnesses go the natural way and go out of buisness.They will then cynically "call " for the banks to lend more to struggling small buisness,deflecting the blame from themselves and fooling the gullible. At the same time Lenihan and the other top politicians who own the banks on behalf of the taxpayer have told the banks not to engage in risky lending.
I for one don`t believe Ireland will default even though the government is borrowing 500 million from abroad every week to keep going. The government has lots of tools in its arsenal. It can raise taxes on income and property or cut spending and welfare.And no one is really badly off as we still have a very generous welfare system and plenty of goods in the shops.
I don`t know much about the american banks,but what I will say ..is that the time to start up a prudent local bank is during the good times. We still have credit unions so what is wrong with them?
Even if you got 10 million e to start up your bank who would you lend the money to?
And what guarantees would you expect?
 
Sunrock, I swear I didn't deliberately set a trap for you, but you'll notice the one thing I didn't suggest was abandoning the Euro experiment.
I endorsed McWilliams basic point but didn't suggest what he did.
The issue of fractional reserve banking is at the heart of all financial institutions today so I suggest you get a handle on it - I'm only limping along at thsi stuff myself, so you may well overtake me, but at least I'm starting to see behind all the waffle the banks spew out.

"Anyway it had or has nothing to do with why the banks won`t lend."

OTC, this is at the heart of why they claim they won't lend but I agree with you in a funny kind of way - they are scared to lend because of the mess they created in the first place.
Some institution with balls needs to step into the breach to do the job they banks can't or won't - the Government will soon be faced with this task.
My idea of a Bank would have allowed the Government to lend NOW, in the ope it will save jobs and skills acquired during the boom.
Doing thsi direct lending will be supporting the economy while costing them far less than it is going to cost to economise the main banks.
They can demand higher standards and achieve better results by requiring enforcement of governance on each and every loan.
But simply pretending to lend and then not lending to "safe" risks will stop and the economy can start growing again.

"You seem obsessed with "darwinism" as if it was a bad thing. The term has no moral compass....it just describes the way animals evolve in the natural world."

You're correct again sunrock, but again for reasons that are different from the ones you assume.

Darwinism attempts to describe a process of natural selection - what's going on in Ireland is anything but "natural".
Natural selection assumes critical factors a population can recover from - extended inclement weather, food shortages, a new predator.
What is doing on in Ireland is a poisoning of the economic well-water by banks refusing to lend to people who can repay them.
If this is allowed to continue we'll become involved in an Extinction Level Event - and ELE for short - and that doesn't lead to selection.

And please don't parrot that stupid American Judge who decided that the only responsibility of a company is to its shareholders.
If we are giving company entities the same rights as people - to hold property, make transactions, acquire loans - then they can be held to account for their "moral lapses" as well - and a single industry [Finance] causing world-wide poverty that inevitably leads to disease, famine, depression, suicide and death is a "Moral Lapse" if ever there was one.

"Even if you got 10 million e to start up your bank who would you lend the money to?
And what guarantees would you expect? "


Outside my experience sunrock.
I'm simply seeing the need for liquidity in the Irish economy.
There will have to be rigorous assessment, but once someone can prove they can pay they should get the loan

The anecdotal evidence offered on this thread of lending doesn't match my and others' anecdotal experience of the Banks.
I'm rejecting the easy fig leaf of "too risk lend" that the banks have put forward as their excuse for not lending.

Why? Are they afraid that if they lend a billion or two they might see a percentage of these loans - go bad?

Don't make me laugh!

The damage is not about to occur.
Their actuaries have wholly failed in their task.
Their assessors of securitized debt have been grossly negligent.
The horse is gone and taken the barn door with it - the parrot is deceased!!!
If these clowns in the big banks suffer a 20% medium term default - so WHAT??!
Its the least pain they might suffer for having landed us in the hell hole that we're in!

But what I worry about is the suspicion that they know something we don't.
Are these guys privy to something nasty in the books of one bank?
Like the final resolution effect of Anglo's derivatives Loan Book?
Is there something in that s***pipe that may ye destroy us?

Because other than that the housing market is stabilising this year - assuming someone in NAMA doesn't flood the market with houses in stupid places.
With the longer days and sunshine people are starting to feel more confident and spend again.
So if there's something coming down the pipe I'd really like to know something about it.
I don't want to sit there like a Muppet watching the banks stifle the recovery.

ONQ.
 
Back
Top