Woman on news tonight - Kaupthing Edge???

I saw that news broadcast. To which I would say to her.

Sorry dear, but you tried to extract the last 1/4% of yield. Higher yield = higher risk. The Icelanics have gone very quiet on their "FSA" guarantee of Eu15K. I'd forget it. They have stolen her £12K, hence zero balance. Why should we reimburse her losses in a risky investment, when we have had similar uncompensated losses, eg B&B shares.

Iceland has the population of Leicester. The country has nothing. It is totally bust and has nothing to offer. I feel we should do our best to further collapse their currency as punishment. We can manage without their cod and herring.

Please read my earlier post re Landbanski's very upbeat report on July

1. Their CEO belongs in a prison cell besides armed robbers.

Let's freeze then sell all Icelanic assets and use the minimal proceeds to pay something back to British savers first.

At least we can be glad no Icelandics will be trusted in financial services again for a very long time.

Stan

Well, unlike Ice Save, Kaupthing Edge were definitely described as being a UK bank fully protected by the FSCS and unless the article I read on the ING buyout was intentionally misleading, it definitely stated that it should be business as usual for Kaupthing Edge UK savers.

So now I really am confused!

Kaupthing Edge was a UK bank protected under the FSCS guarantee. She'll get her 12k back.

ING have already said that there is a backlog processing transactions and they'll all be processed soon.

You've got a really strange idea of risk if you think saving in a bank account with government guarantees is a similar risk to buying shares. Presumably you think I've been as foolish to have money in a Barclays Bank Isa as I've been buying and selling Barclays shares - same company, same risk?

And presumably you think B&B savers ought to have lost everything as well as the shareholders?

It certainly seems like the Icelandic government has tried to steal the Icesave deposits. Barings went under due to crooked dealings and yet no saver lost any money. Bond holders certainly did.

Tim.

So why are WE compensating IceSave savers ? That's our money they are throwing at them. I saw the interview with the Icelandic PM and can't understand why our people were so gentle on him. Why has the Iceandic Eu10K guarantee gone quiet ?

Stan

I am aware of the pecking order in the event of insovency. But I cannot explain why the UK govt is content to wipe out B&B shareholders, yet compensate (with no obligation to do so) IceSave savers.

Stan

share holders are vultures, savers are customers.

So, you are saying people who sat on ther demutualisation shares are vultures; yet savers to a FOREIGN bank are honourable customers who need protecting ???

I'm saying shareholders peck off the flesh of customers.

But are you saying that UK taxpayers should protect savers in FOREIGN banks ???

In message , Stan wrote

Yep, the only reason you have those shares is because customers voted for 'free' money without questioning where it came from. As a result B&B became worthless when the bubble burst.

Shareholders are always told that the value of their investment can go down as well as up. Savers in the foreign owned bank were told that their money was protected, not by one, but by two approved schemes.

Do you think that there would have been circa 4 billion of UK (private) investment if the FSA had said they would guarantee amounts between 16K and 32K but the other guarantee is completely worthless and could never pay out, as they had a duty of care to do so? The FSA endorsed a flawed product and heads should roll.

BTW, I have also lost money on B&B shares and will have lost in Icesave.

I wonder what will happen if Ireland or Holland default on their guarantees to British savers? I wonder if our Government have endorsed the transfer of Icelandic savings accounts to ING to prevent a run on that organisation?

I'm a UK tax payer, I'm also a saver in "UK banks" but under no illusions they are almost all foreign banks in all but name. I honestly don't know what I think about the Icesave debacle at the moment. I do however think it is important to distiguish between savers and speculators. For what it's worth I also have stock market "investment" funds and fully expect to see their value drop to very little if anything.

Savers in the foreign owned bank were told that

So my point is we should sell off (even at fire sale prices) Icelandic assets in the UK and use the money to compensate savers at least up to the promised Eu20K (or thereabouts) protection.

So, do you agree with the UK taxpayer compensating £0-16K ? If so, the the govt prefers savers in foreign banks to investors in UK banks.

Agree 100%. It's easy for a gov't to say "we guarantee 100%". But, eg Ireland could NEVER payout if everybody wanted their money back in Euros now, even more so after a major catastrophe. Ireland simply does not have enough Euros.

So pension funds are vultures?

because /our/ government messed us up?

In message , Stan wrote

What makes you think that isn't going to happen? The UK Government has agreed that full compensation should be paid to stop a panic run on other banks that don't have enough funds to cover the liability. I'm sure that the final bill will be presented to the banking industry (assuming that there still is one) and the Icelandic Government in the future.

By having a fire sale of frozen Icelandic interests (ignoring any legal implications) may mean that certain high street businesses in the UK go down the drain resulting in unemployment for British workers. The Government would then have to pick up yet another large social bill with no chance of getting any money back on this deal.

Who do you think owns the biggest banks trading on our High Streets? So far in this 'crisis' the Government has favoured Dutch or Spanish owned banks as the saviours of our banking system probably because they know that UK owned banks are perilously close to collapse themselves.

Do you think that UK owned banks would be in such a difficult position if they had lent the money you had invested in them in a prudent manner?

Consider also why UK investors flocked to the new Internet banks (which are/were regulated, all or in part, by our financial regulators). Could it be that many 'traditional' UK banks were at times very dishonest in the way they treated customers? How many times did they offer accounts with 'sensible' (not necessarily high) rates of interest only to cut them to 0.1% a few years later when they went after a new lot of investors i.e. f**k the existing customer because we already have his money. My (cash) savings have been moved out of three banks/societies in the last 10 years because of this practice. I am unlikely to return to these organisations again even though they may be UK owned and may like my money in these troubled times.

Perhaps UK banking stability depends on brand loyalty that no longer exists?

It doesn't matter what or where the speculation comes from. Stock market investment in all it's forms is purely and simply a gamble to try and get ahead of the game, to grow the value of the initial bet and receive fat winning payouts in the process as feeds off it's customers.

Read the KE website. Pending transactions are being processed. In fact mine came through overnight.

Are you sure that they don't peck off the flesh of the workers as well? It's generally the frontline employees that face job cuts and low/zero pay rises due to the need to "maximise shareholder value". Of course this somehow doesn't seem to apply to the executives on telephone number salaries and bonuses though...

What was it exactly that made you so bitter and twisted?