Britain’s biggest police force faces being broken up if it does not rapidly overhaul a toxic culture that will be exposed in an independent report tomorrow, The Times has learnt.
Baroness Casey of Blackstock’s excoriating review — ordered after Sarah Everard was abducted, raped and murdered by the serving Metropolitan Police officer Wayne Couzens in 2021 — found institutional problems of sexism, racism and homophobia.
Casey is expected to detail a culture of bullying, officers being placed under unbearable work pressure and a failure of the Met’s leadership to get to grips with a series of misconduct scandals.
Whitehall sources said that the 300-page report was “do or die” for the Met, revealing that Casey had made a series of hard-hitting recommendations with the requirement that progress be monitored by a new oversight board, led by the mayor of London. They said the option was left open for more radical reform, including structural changes, if a drastic overhaul did not occur.
There have long been calls for more specialist areas, such as the national counter-terrorism command, to be split off and subsumed by the National Crime Agency to allow the Met to get to grips with policing London.
One source said “nothing is off the table” in the long term but added that it was crucial to give Sir Mark Rowley, who took over as the Met commissioner in September, time for reforms.
Casey is understood to have uncovered widespread failings in every department she examined, including the parliamentary and diplomatic protection command. She will recommend that the unit, in which Couzens and the serial sex offender David Carrick both served, be “effectively disbanded”.
Isn't there a crisis in policing across the country? Can you name a single force that has a stellar reputstion?
The Met is one of five forces in special measures. My own county force, Gloucestershire, is one of them, and having had some dealings with them recently I find that far from surprising.
The whole police system across the country needs a thorough shake up. Step forward...
Suella Braverman?
Gloucestershire police could cut crime in half tomorrow just by committing rather less of it.
As for the Met how many bloody chances does it need? Enough already. Break it up into five different forces each with their own Commissioner, Police Authority and PCC. That’s been needed for over 100 years.
And at the same time, change the rules on disciplinary procedures so they are completed whether you resign or not (and that could be usefully applied in other fields as well, the way it is in teaching).
How the flip would breaking up the Met help? Something needs to be done; breaking up the Met is something; therefore... But no word on how things will change along with the cap badge. Will the sub-Mets magically become better at policing, and less corrupt? I doubt it. No mechanism is offered. The government has no idea and a reorganisation will disguise that.
The larger the organisation, the more difficult it is to control because the more remote and impersonal the processes are. That makes it much easier for miscreants to hide their misdemeanours as everyone will wait for someone else to deal with it while the people at the top won't know what's happening.
There is a reason, in my own field, why private schools are generally small and state school that get into trouble are often very large.
It's not a cast iron rule - I've known terrible small organisations and brilliant larger ones - but it seems to happen too often to be a coincidence.
It would also reduce the opportunities for people to transfer away before problems emerge. Although that requires wider reform of police disciplinary processes.
It also confuses the management and leads them to focus on too many things at once, becoming a Jack of all trades and master of none, a la OFSTED.
You can imagine that a national counter terrorism agency, a diplomatic protection squad, a properly organised National Crime Agency taking over the met's functions there and a dedicated local police force for London - or even two - would help, if it were a reorganisation properly managed and intelligently worked out.
An apparent inflation rate over 20%. For significant parts of the country, life is becoming increasingly precarious.
Cost of living: 'I never thought I'd be sofa-surfing at 74' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-64983317 ...The letting agency has seen average rents increase from £989 per calendar month in January 2022, to £1,241 this January, yet there is no let-up in demand...
Housing: if you own outright in this country you have reached the promised land. If you have a mortgage then you keep everything crossed that you don't get laid off - or that your wages don't fall so low that you can no longer afford to service it. If you rent then, unless you're lucky enough to be in social housing with a good provider, you are up the proverbial without a paddle.
That septuagenarian who's sofa surfing is the harbinger of many millions in decades to come - have nots who couldn't afford to buy will be working til they drop to service extortionate rents, before ending up in hostels or sleeping rough in their 70s and 80s. A wholly avoidable humanitarian crisis, deliberately generated by Government policy.
If that does happen then there will be (eventually) a left-wing government that turns property rights on its head and probably drives capital flight out of the country and a broader economic collapse.
The next government must must must do something about the affordability of property.
You've already written off the current government ?
I'm not sure how much can be done in the next 18 months.
Getting inflation down and interest rates trimmed a bit is, realistically, probably it.
That's hardly an excuse for continuing to ignore one if the country's more pressing problems. If they believed they had any chance at all of being re-elected, they'd be looking beyond the next 18 months. As any responsible government should in any event be doing.
'Let's leave all the problems to the next lot' is an appalling attitude for a party which likes to call itself the natural party of government.
Though the budgetary plans have already done an awful lot of shoving difficult problems about 2-3 years into the future, set to be made worse if the government does the cut in the basic rate we're all(?) expecting them to try in 2024.
And older homeowners with time to complain about things going on up their backyard are about the only Conservative voters left right now, so Sunak daren't annoy them.
It's not a party political point (though given the current lot have been in fit over a decade, it might seem so), but I despise the attitude
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
On the off chance any pollsters are lurking,
“Who do you trust more? Boris Johnson or Sue Gray?”
Would make for an interesting question.
I recon the public would split 80/20 in favour of our Sue.
I have no doubt you are correct, but Burley seems to think it will be part of Johnson's defence on Wednesday
It's just smoke. The committee has already stated explicitly that it is not relying on the Gray report. And in any event, the matters of fact in the report stand in their own merits.
Johnson's tactics in this case are remarkably Trumpian.
And unsurprisingly that uncertainty of where bondholders sit has done nothing to calm markets, in fact it's made everything worse.
Well done Swiss government, what a fucking bang up job you've done here. Morons.
Legislating to bypass shareholders in order to force the takeover, without considering the bondholders, which seems to be the case, was a serious mistake. A fair accompli is fine when there's no concern over values (SVB UK), but otherwise it's just deferring dealing with the problem.
Probably would have been much cheaper to sort out in the medium term, if the government had just taken on the problem itself.
Well they did consider the bond holders, specifically they have said 14bn in bonds will be zeroed out while shareholders will receive 2.7bn in UBS shares. This is a disaster and bank bonds are going to crash today.
I think I may get called home this afternoon. So thank you very much Switzerland.
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
The problem with that argument is she was only appointed because every other possible candidate - including the politically appointed Case - was under investigation.
I agree it isn't a good look but the issue is the widespread flouting of the rules that Johnson not only took part in but actively encouraged.
And then, patently, lied about.
If he tries to move it onto this territory all that happens is he underlines how widespread the practice he said happened as a moment of madness was.
It's clear that Johnson is fighting for his political life here. And we know that in those circumstances, he will say and do anything to survive. And anyone who gets in his way is fair game.
I don't see how he survives this- the arithmetic is against him- but he may well leave a trail of destruction in his attempts to cling on.
It's worked for him for 35 years. Why would he change a winning formula?
He should because he's playing a different game in a different climate.
He's not broken unwritten rules here, so the pile of bluster approach won't work. And he's yesterday's man not heir apparent, so the unsubtle bullying won't work either.
A bit like a music hall turn failing to adapt to the advent of television, Johnson was to arrogant / lazy / incapable to keep his act fresh.
Well, yes, but that would require him to develop enough intelligence and integrity to see it. He simply doesn't have it.
For a suspension of Johnson to happen it would need about 20% of Conservative MPs to vote with Opposition MPs for it
It's a good job for you that 20%+ of Tory MPs don't utterly loathe Johnson and want his political career permanently ended, then.
Most of their local party members though don't, so if 20% do vote to suspend Johnson and try and force a by election in Uxbridge then they also risk deselection by their local Associations
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
Yes it will be. So the question remains, was Sir Keir Starmer KCB KC MP very clever or very stupid in courting Ms Gray, knowing Boris would use it as a lifeline?
And unsurprisingly that uncertainty of where bondholders sit has done nothing to calm markets, in fact it's made everything worse.
Well done Swiss government, what a fucking bang up job you've done here. Morons.
Legislating to bypass shareholders in order to force the takeover, without considering the bondholders, which seems to be the case, was a serious mistake. A fair accompli is fine when there's no concern over values (SVB UK), but otherwise it's just deferring dealing with the problem.
Probably would have been much cheaper to sort out in the medium term, if the government had just taken on the problem itself.
Well they did consider the bond holders, specifically they have said 14bn in bonds will be zeroed out while shareholders will receive 2.7bn in UBS shares. This is a disaster and bank bonds are going to crash today.
I think I may get called home this afternoon. So thank you very much Switzerland.
An example of badly managed bondage?
It usually ends with somebody in A&E with a sex toy stuffed somewhere improbable.
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
On the off chance any pollsters are lurking;
“Who do you trust more? Boris Johnson or Sue Gray?”
Would make for an interesting question.
I recon the public would split ~80/20 in favour of our Sue.
If Goodwin ran the poll:
“Who do you trust more? Well meaning victim of witch hunt Boris Johnson or friend of Keir Starmer & future Labour chief of staff Sue Gray?”
Probly still be 80/20 mind.
What on Earth was Starmer thinking, hiring Sue Gray while all this Johnson stuff was still ongoing?
It looks terrible, and is going to give the Tories the opportunity to question the timeline, in an attempt to discredit her as a political stooge.
I don't think Starmer cares. If the Tories keep him, they'll have the moral carcass of Big Dog knocking against their hull. If he's dispatched, then the Tories are again that much more divided.
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
On the off chance any pollsters are lurking;
“Who do you trust more? Boris Johnson or Sue Gray?”
Would make for an interesting question.
I recon the public would split ~80/20 in favour of our Sue.
If Goodwin ran the poll:
“Who do you trust more? Well meaning victim of witch hunt Boris Johnson or friend of Keir Starmer & future Labour chief of staff Sue Gray?”
Probly still be 80/20 mind.
What on Earth was Starmer thinking, hiring Sue Gray while all this Johnson stuff was still ongoing?
It looks terrible, and is going to give the Tories the opportunity to question the timeline, in an attempt to discredit her as a political stooge.
I don't think Starmer cares. If the Tories keep him, they'll have the moral carcass of Big Dog knocking against their hull. If he's dispatched, then the Tories are again that much more divided.
It also helpfully emphasises that senior people working for the government (a) can't stand them and (b) are taking him seriously.
And he gets lots of free publicity for it.
Should he have done it? Probably not. Will he be unhappy? Definitely not...
For a suspension of Johnson to happen it would need about 20% of Conservative MPs to vote with Opposition MPs for it
It's a good job for you that 20%+ of Tory MPs don't utterly loathe Johnson and want his political career permanently ended, then.
Most of their local party members though don't, so if 20% do vote to suspend Johnson and try and force a by election in Uxbridge then they also risk deselection by their local Associations
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
On the off chance any pollsters are lurking;
“Who do you trust more? Boris Johnson or Sue Gray?”
Would make for an interesting question.
I recon the public would split ~80/20 in favour of our Sue.
If Goodwin ran the poll:
“Who do you trust more? Well meaning victim of witch hunt Boris Johnson or friend of Keir Starmer & future Labour chief of staff Sue Gray?”
Probly still be 80/20 mind.
What on Earth was Starmer thinking, hiring Sue Gray while all this Johnson stuff was still ongoing?
It looks terrible, and is going to give the Tories the opportunity to question the timeline, in an attempt to discredit her as a political stooge.
I don't think Starmer cares. If the Tories keep him, they'll have the moral carcass of Big Dog knocking against their hull. If he's dispatched, then the Tories are again that much more divided.
Also, is every single person going up against the Tories, or seen by them as doing so (which is not the same), to suspend their career progress for years while they refuse to clear up their mess? Especially as it was Mr Johnson's own picked CabSec who reportedly told her to "no more jobs for you here, now piss off to the Jobcentre"?
An apparent inflation rate over 20%. For significant parts of the country, life is becoming increasingly precarious.
Cost of living: 'I never thought I'd be sofa-surfing at 74' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-64983317 ...The letting agency has seen average rents increase from £989 per calendar month in January 2022, to £1,241 this January, yet there is no let-up in demand...
Housing: if you own outright in this country you have reached the promised land. If you have a mortgage then you keep everything crossed that you don't get laid off - or that your wages don't fall so low that you can no longer afford to service it. If you rent then, unless you're lucky enough to be in social housing with a good provider, you are up the proverbial without a paddle.
That septuagenarian who's sofa surfing is the harbinger of many millions in decades to come - have nots who couldn't afford to buy will be working til they drop to service extortionate rents, before ending up in hostels or sleeping rough in their 70s and 80s. A wholly avoidable humanitarian crisis, deliberately generated by Government policy.
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
His lies to Parliament are recorded in Hansard. We watched him say them on TV.
Everything else is theatre, distraction and whataboutery.
He's banged to rights.
He also apologised for some things but is now arguing he had nothing to apologise for since Sue Gray stitched him up, at least that's how his proxies are selling it.
Bottom line is he is trying to argue the difference between misleading and knowingly misleading (regardless of whether the committe is interested in the distinction), since the former has already been proven.
He has 2 options to argue: that he is a titanic fool who literally could not understand what was happening in front of his face, and throwing out complex legal claims as a distraction so people can act as though there is a beyond reasonable doubt standard of proof to sanction him.
The man is a liar and has long gotten away with lying. He's now wailing because that reputation of being a liar is finally affecting his credibility when he claims this time he's being truthful.
For a suspension of Johnson to happen it would need about 20% of Conservative MPs to vote with Opposition MPs for it
The Government's working majority is 66, so only about 10% need to swap sides to erase it. Stick a fork in the evil bastard, he's done.
Depends if the DUP vote against it or not
The DUP vote for a man who sold them out with an Irish Sea border?
If they do that they've achieved the impossible. They've been even stupider than I thought.
They would be voting to snub Sunak and Starmer more than save Boris. The DUP basically now work in tandem with the ERG, they basically want a hard Brexit for Northern Ireland as well as GB
By allowing banks to borrow directly from the central bank they reduce the risk of a sudden run on a bank tipping it into insolvency but they do so by nationalising the risk. This policy is 2008 redux but I am seeing very little sign that we face systemic risks right now. Some banks, allegedly including HSBC, will have taken a bath on money owed by Credit Suisse but we are not seeing a lot of evidence of banks being unwilling to lend to each other as we did in 2008.
This "cure" seems to positively encourage the disease to me, by addressing problems that don't exist it scares people into thinking they do.
For a suspension of Johnson to happen it would need about 20% of Conservative MPs to vote with Opposition MPs for it
It's a good job for you that 20%+ of Tory MPs don't utterly loathe Johnson and want his political career permanently ended, then.
Most of their local party members though don't, so if 20% do vote to suspend Johnson and try and force a by election in Uxbridge then they also risk deselection by their local Associations
The committee could get around that by recommending a sanction below the threshold for a petition. What pretext to reject it then?
And unsurprisingly that uncertainty of where bondholders sit has done nothing to calm markets, in fact it's made everything worse.
Well done Swiss government, what a fucking bang up job you've done here. Morons.
Legislating to bypass shareholders in order to force the takeover, without considering the bondholders, which seems to be the case, was a serious mistake. A fair accompli is fine when there's no concern over values (SVB UK), but otherwise it's just deferring dealing with the problem.
Probably would have been much cheaper to sort out in the medium term, if the government had just taken on the problem itself.
Well they did consider the bond holders, specifically they have said 14bn in bonds will be zeroed out while shareholders will receive 2.7bn in UBS shares. This is a disaster and bank bonds are going to crash today.
I think I may get called home this afternoon. So thank you very much Switzerland.
Huh. I thought that the point of organising a rescue would have been to mostly wipe out the shareholders in order to save the bondholders. I guess Credit Suisse must have been in even more trouble if they've wiped out 14bn in bonds. I wonder which banks were holding those bonds?
I did hope that we might get more than 15 years between banking crises.
Our village hall committee have tasked me with the challenge of replacing our old Queen Elizabeth photo with one of KC ahead of the Coronation. Is there an official one I can download?
And unsurprisingly that uncertainty of where bondholders sit has done nothing to calm markets, in fact it's made everything worse.
Well done Swiss government, what a fucking bang up job you've done here. Morons.
Legislating to bypass shareholders in order to force the takeover, without considering the bondholders, which seems to be the case, was a serious mistake. A fair accompli is fine when there's no concern over values (SVB UK), but otherwise it's just deferring dealing with the problem.
Probably would have been much cheaper to sort out in the medium term, if the government had just taken on the problem itself.
Well they did consider the bond holders, specifically they have said 14bn in bonds will be zeroed out while shareholders will receive 2.7bn in UBS shares. This is a disaster and bank bonds are going to crash today.
I think I may get called home this afternoon. So thank you very much Switzerland.
An example of badly managed bondage?
It usually ends with somebody in A&E with a sex toy stuffed somewhere improbable.
As someone once remarked...."the number of people who fall on their vacuum cleaners....."
UK gas futures have fallen to under 100p per therm, the lowest they have been since Russia invaded Ukraine. The linkage between these prices and the cost of fuel is somewhat opaque but the cost of extending the price guarantee may prove to be minimal for the government. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cxwdwz5d8gxt/natural-gas
For a suspension of Johnson to happen it would need about 20% of Conservative MPs to vote with Opposition MPs for it
It's a good job for you that 20%+ of Tory MPs don't utterly loathe Johnson and want his political career permanently ended, then.
Most of their local party members though don't, so if 20% do vote to suspend Johnson and try and force a by election in Uxbridge then they also risk deselection by their local Associations
The committee could get around that by recommending a sanction below the threshold for a petition. What pretext to reject it then?
Quite a few Conservative MPs have announced that they’re not standing at the next election. Effectively gives them a free vote! What we also have to remember is that the committee will deliberate after having heard the mixture of lies, and quarter-truths which will be Johnson’s defence, and that deliberation is expected to take quite a while. I don’t think the Labour Party in Uxbridge can start collecting signatures yet for a recall petition.
And good morning to all; grey and somewhat damp, here.
What I find doubly mental this morning is that apparently CS were resisting the take over all weekend and insisting that any takeover valuation be at a premium to their Friday close.
The Swiss had a great opportunity to lance the boil and they've well and truly fucked it. The culture it CS is said to be awful, I've heard from people who previously worked there that it was cult like and anyone who questioned the narrative that they were Switzerland's premier bank just going through a rough patch was pushed out.
UBS needs to announce that everyone from c level down to senior management should start updating their CVs. Don't let the delusional idiots get a toehold.
And unsurprisingly that uncertainty of where bondholders sit has done nothing to calm markets, in fact it's made everything worse.
Well done Swiss government, what a fucking bang up job you've done here. Morons.
Legislating to bypass shareholders in order to force the takeover, without considering the bondholders, which seems to be the case, was a serious mistake. A fair accompli is fine when there's no concern over values (SVB UK), but otherwise it's just deferring dealing with the problem.
Probably would have been much cheaper to sort out in the medium term, if the government had just taken on the problem itself.
Well they did consider the bond holders, specifically they have said 14bn in bonds will be zeroed out while shareholders will receive 2.7bn in UBS shares. This is a disaster and bank bonds are going to crash today.
I think I may get called home this afternoon. So thank you very much Switzerland.
I'm trying to think this through. Is it possible that there were other Swiss financial institutions who could be at risk if their shareholding in Credit Suisse was suddenly worthless so this is a back door way of keeping them solvent?
UK gas futures have fallen to under 100p per therm, the lowest they have been since Russia invaded Ukraine. The linkage between these prices and the cost of fuel is somewhat opaque but the cost of extending the price guarantee may prove to be minimal for the government. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cxwdwz5d8gxt/natural-gas
Brent Crude heading down towards $70 as well, from over $80 a week ago.
UK gas futures have fallen to under 100p per therm, the lowest they have been since Russia invaded Ukraine. The linkage between these prices and the cost of fuel is somewhat opaque but the cost of extending the price guarantee may prove to be minimal for the government. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cxwdwz5d8gxt/natural-gas
Needs the price of electricity to come down to help many of us. Since the government has been pushing for people to switch away from fossil fuels toward renewable electricity via ASHPs for heating, they cannot leave those who have taken that step high and dry. Just saying.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
UK gas futures have fallen to under 100p per therm, the lowest they have been since Russia invaded Ukraine. The linkage between these prices and the cost of fuel is somewhat opaque but the cost of extending the price guarantee may prove to be minimal for the government. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cxwdwz5d8gxt/natural-gas
Brent Crude heading down towards $70 as well, from over $80 a week ago.
We could soon be panicking about deflation at this rate.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
And unsurprisingly that uncertainty of where bondholders sit has done nothing to calm markets, in fact it's made everything worse.
Well done Swiss government, what a fucking bang up job you've done here. Morons.
Legislating to bypass shareholders in order to force the takeover, without considering the bondholders, which seems to be the case, was a serious mistake. A fair accompli is fine when there's no concern over values (SVB UK), but otherwise it's just deferring dealing with the problem.
Probably would have been much cheaper to sort out in the medium term, if the government had just taken on the problem itself.
Well they did consider the bond holders, specifically they have said 14bn in bonds will be zeroed out while shareholders will receive 2.7bn in UBS shares. This is a disaster and bank bonds are going to crash today.
I think I may get called home this afternoon. So thank you very much Switzerland.
I'm trying to think this through. Is it possible that there were other Swiss financial institutions who could be at risk if their shareholding in Credit Suisse was suddenly worthless so this is a back door way of keeping them solvent?
I seriously doubt it. This looks, to me, like one of those bright ideas from a politician who has CS shares and then no one thought through the consequences of re-ordering the insolvency chain. UBS would have been better off buying them out of bankruptcy, this is legitimately worse than the Lloyds/HBOS shotgun wedding and that ended in disaster for the UK.
UK gas futures have fallen to under 100p per therm, the lowest they have been since Russia invaded Ukraine. The linkage between these prices and the cost of fuel is somewhat opaque but the cost of extending the price guarantee may prove to be minimal for the government. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cxwdwz5d8gxt/natural-gas
Brent Crude heading down towards $70 as well, from over $80 a week ago.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
Our village hall committee have tasked me with the challenge of replacing our old Queen Elizabeth photo with one of KC ahead of the Coronation. Is there an official one I can download?
And unsurprisingly that uncertainty of where bondholders sit has done nothing to calm markets, in fact it's made everything worse.
Well done Swiss government, what a fucking bang up job you've done here. Morons.
Legislating to bypass shareholders in order to force the takeover, without considering the bondholders, which seems to be the case, was a serious mistake. A fair accompli is fine when there's no concern over values (SVB UK), but otherwise it's just deferring dealing with the problem.
Probably would have been much cheaper to sort out in the medium term, if the government had just taken on the problem itself.
Well they did consider the bond holders, specifically they have said 14bn in bonds will be zeroed out while shareholders will receive 2.7bn in UBS shares. This is a disaster and bank bonds are going to crash today.
I think I may get called home this afternoon. So thank you very much Switzerland.
I'm trying to think this through. Is it possible that there were other Swiss financial institutions who could be at risk if their shareholding in Credit Suisse was suddenly worthless so this is a back door way of keeping them solvent?
I seriously doubt it. This looks, to me, like one of those bright ideas from a politician who has CS shares and then no one thought through the consequences of re-ordering the insolvency chain. UBS would have been better off buying them out of bankruptcy, this is legitimately worse than the Lloyds/HBOS shotgun wedding and that ended in disaster for the UK.
That politician is still going to be taking a huge loss on those CS shares, are the not?
UK gas futures have fallen to under 100p per therm, the lowest they have been since Russia invaded Ukraine. The linkage between these prices and the cost of fuel is somewhat opaque but the cost of extending the price guarantee may prove to be minimal for the government. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cxwdwz5d8gxt/natural-gas
Brent Crude heading down towards $70 as well, from over $80 a week ago.
We could soon be panicking about deflation at this rate.
Public sector unions better nail down those deals while they still can.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
I thought the Swiss were supposed to be good at this whole finance malarkey?
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
I have to say watching all of this unfold is like reliving 2008 a bit. In the US we had a bank attempting to run a business model very similar to Northern Rock or RBS at well over 50:1 leverage and now in Switzerland we've got a shotgun wedding that makes Lloyds/HBOS look like brilliant strategic planning.
What I don't understand is what CS have been doing for the last 15 years and why UBS has said yes to the buyout. I'd have told the Swiss government to get fucked and that I'd look at purchasing the viable assets after insolvency.
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
If he really has "evidence" that shows he didn't lie then he would have no need to attack the process. It's straight out of the Trump playbook, attack and malign everyone involved and carry on lying through your teeth.
How controversial the outcome is will depend on how the vote splits. If the committee all believe he is guilty it is going to be difficult to paint it as an opposition stitch up. lf it splits on party lines the Tories will then be open to the same accusation as they were in the Owen Paterson case.
Whatever parliament decides I think a large majority of the public have already concluded that Johnson is an inveterate liar so most will be predisposed to believe that anything he comes up with this week will be another batch of lies to try to save his own miserable neck. I do wonder how many Tory MPs would privately like to see the back of him.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
Bad news on the chocolate front, boss:
Mondelez International, the U.S. company that owns Toblerone, is shifting part of its production to Slovakia starting in July, in a move announced last year aimed at cutting costs.
That appears to violate Switzerland's "Swissness Act," which since 2017 has required products to meet certain criteria in order to use Swiss symbols (like the Swiss cross) or call themselves Swiss-made.
What I find doubly mental this morning is that apparently CS were resisting the take over all weekend and insisting that any takeover valuation be at a premium to their Friday close.
The Swiss had a great opportunity to lance the boil and they've well and truly fucked it. The culture it CS is said to be awful, I've heard from people who previously worked there that it was cult like and anyone who questioned the narrative that they were Switzerland's premier bank just going through a rough patch was pushed out.
UBS needs to announce that everyone from c level down to senior management should start updating their CVs. Don't let the delusional idiots get a toehold.
What I don't understand is how the Swiss government could effectively award shareholders several billion, while simultaneously wiping out a class of bondholders who (I understand) rank above shareholders ?
For a suspension of Johnson to happen it would need about 20% of Conservative MPs to vote with Opposition MPs for it
The Government's working majority is 66, so only about 10% need to swap sides to erase it. Stick a fork in the evil bastard, he's done.
Depends if the DUP vote against it or not
The DUP vote for a man who sold them out with an Irish Sea border?
If they do that they've achieved the impossible. They've been even stupider than I thought.
They would be voting to snub Sunak and Starmer more than save Boris. The DUP basically now work in tandem with the ERG, they basically want a hard Brexit for Northern Ireland as well as GB
They are fighting the last war like the Japanese soldier found in the jungle decades after the war ended
Just checked into slack for 5 mins, one of our guys worked out that CS was probably worth €-18bn so UBS shares still have some way to fall.
If you have written off the bonds surely that goes down?
Hmm yes, I guess he didn't take that into account over the weekend lol.
FWIW on your justified frustration re the shareholders getting money don’t forget they actually own the business. The CoCos can be wiped by executive fiat but (short of expropriation) the shareholders have to *sell* the shares.
It’s quite common in restructuring situations to see the equity holders get something even while the bonds take a haircut - if they don’t acquiesce then you end up with an uncontrolled bankruptcy
UK gas futures have fallen to under 100p per therm, the lowest they have been since Russia invaded Ukraine. The linkage between these prices and the cost of fuel is somewhat opaque but the cost of extending the price guarantee may prove to be minimal for the government. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cxwdwz5d8gxt/natural-gas
Needs the price of electricity to come down to help many of us. Since the government has been pushing for people to switch away from fossil fuels toward renewable electricity via ASHPs for heating, they cannot leave those who have taken that step high and dry. Just saying.
The price for electricity has largely been fixed by the price for gas since gas fired power stations have been providing about 40% of our power. My understanding is that some other supplies, such as wind, are generating windfall (ha) profits at the moment selling into that market.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
I have to say watching all of this unfold is like reliving 2008 a bit. In the US we had a bank attempting to run a business model very similar to Northern Rock or RBS at well over 50:1 leverage and now in Switzerland we've got a shotgun wedding that makes Lloyds/HBOS look like brilliant strategic planning.
What I don't understand is what CS have been doing for the last 15 years and why UBS has said yes to the buyout. I'd have told the Swiss government to get fucked and that I'd look at purchasing the viable assets after insolvency.
The red flag for me was BlackRock taking one look at the deal offered and saying no.
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
On the off chance any pollsters are lurking;
“Who do you trust more? Boris Johnson or Sue Gray?”
Would make for an interesting question.
I recon the public would split ~80/20 in favour of our Sue.
If Goodwin ran the poll:
“Who do you trust more? Well meaning victim of witch hunt Boris Johnson or friend of Keir Starmer & future Labour chief of staff Sue Gray?”
Probly still be 80/20 mind.
What on Earth was Starmer thinking, hiring Sue Gray while all this Johnson stuff was still ongoing?
It looks terrible, and is going to give the Tories the opportunity to question the timeline, in an attempt to discredit her as a political stooge.
In the world of 3D chess Sue Gray is a pawn. She’s been played.
It stirs up the mess on the Tory side and costs Starmer nothing
What’s the betting she never actually takes up her position?
What I find doubly mental this morning is that apparently CS were resisting the take over all weekend and insisting that any takeover valuation be at a premium to their Friday close.
The Swiss had a great opportunity to lance the boil and they've well and truly fucked it. The culture it CS is said to be awful, I've heard from people who previously worked there that it was cult like and anyone who questioned the narrative that they were Switzerland's premier bank just going through a rough patch was pushed out.
UBS needs to announce that everyone from c level down to senior management should start updating their CVs. Don't let the delusional idiots get a toehold.
What I don't understand is how the Swiss government could effectively award shareholders several billion, while simultaneously wiping out a class of bondholders who (I understand) rank above shareholders ?
Nobody does yet. Everyone is still scratching their heads waiting for the Swiss government to break cover on the reasoning behind bailing out equity holders and wiping out debt holders. It seems, on the face of it, an insane decision and Swiss corporate financing is going to become much more expensive as bondholders will now ask for a risk premium, especially on bank bonds, and we know those aren't important at all for banks to fund their operations. Not at all.
Which of the following would be best to manage the British economy in the years ahead? A Conservative government with Rishi Sunak as Prime Minister: 17% A Labour government with Keir Starmer as Prime Minister: 30%
I think the Swiss may have just triggered a full on financial crisis. Governments will need to clarify immediately that bondholders still sit above shareholders or the bond markets will just stop working for a while.
How can they not? Bonds are debts owed by the company. The shareholders get what's left when the debts are paid, in this case less than nothing. The position adopted by the Swiss government here is bizarre and eccentric.
UK gas futures have fallen to under 100p per therm, the lowest they have been since Russia invaded Ukraine. The linkage between these prices and the cost of fuel is somewhat opaque but the cost of extending the price guarantee may prove to be minimal for the government. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cxwdwz5d8gxt/natural-gas
Needs the price of electricity to come down to help many of us. Since the government has been pushing for people to switch away from fossil fuels toward renewable electricity via ASHPs for heating, they cannot leave those who have taken that step high and dry. Just saying.
The price for electricity has largely been fixed by the price for gas since gas fired power stations have been providing about 40% of our power. My understanding is that some other supplies, such as wind, are generating windfall (ha) profits at the moment selling into that market.
We just need to see that gas future price fall feed through to falling electricity prices. A lot of poor people in rural areas rely on direct electric heating (not even getting the benefit of ASHPs) because, no gas supply and they can't afford to buy oil by the tankful.
Just checked into slack for 5 mins, one of our guys worked out that CS was probably worth €-18bn so UBS shares still have some way to fall.
If you have written off the bonds surely that goes down?
Hmm yes, I guess he didn't take that into account over the weekend lol.
FWIW on your justified frustration re the shareholders getting money don’t forget they actually own the business. The CoCos can be wiped by executive fiat but (short of expropriation) the shareholders have to *sell* the shares.
It’s quite common in restructuring situations to see the equity holders get something even while the bonds take a haircut - if they don’t acquiesce then you end up with an uncontrolled bankruptcy
The solution to that was always a government edict to protect depositors and then let everything else fall wherever it would fall and then the industry picks up the pieces. As long as depositors were protected the steaming carcass of CS could have chopped up and sold piece meal.
If your family trading company had a couple of million sat in UK bank and savings accounts (waiting to fund a new office build), would you be taking any steps to protect it from possible UK bank failures at this point ? Maybe loan to directors who stick it straight in NS&I and just take the deemed BIK tax consequences ? Asking for a friend.
For a suspension of Johnson to happen it would need about 20% of Conservative MPs to vote with Opposition MPs for it
The Government's working majority is 66, so only about 10% need to swap sides to erase it. Stick a fork in the evil bastard, he's done.
Depends if the DUP vote against it or not
The DUP vote for a man who sold them out with an Irish Sea border?
If they do that they've achieved the impossible. They've been even stupider than I thought.
They would be voting to snub Sunak and Starmer more than save Boris. The DUP basically now work in tandem with the ERG, they basically want a hard Brexit for Northern Ireland as well as GB
They are fighting the last war like the Japanese soldier found in the jungle decades after the war ended
What needs to happen is for a new election to be called in Northern Ireland and for the results to be Sinn Fein, first, Alliance second, with the DUP third. That would set the cat among the pigeons on the Unionist side.
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
Be hilarious if Boris gets the boot but Starmer has blasted away at his own feet with heavy-calibre weaponry because of Sue Gray's appointment (and his very weasally words about the timing).
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
I have to say watching all of this unfold is like reliving 2008 a bit. In the US we had a bank attempting to run a business model very similar to Northern Rock or RBS at well over 50:1 leverage and now in Switzerland we've got a shotgun wedding that makes Lloyds/HBOS look like brilliant strategic planning.
What I don't understand is what CS have been doing for the last 15 years and why UBS has said yes to the buyout. I'd have told the Swiss government to get fucked and that I'd look at purchasing the viable assets after insolvency.
Similar to Lloyds/HBOS, fallible people subject to political pressure, I assume ? The folly of the Lloyds deal was obvious at the time to even a relative financial ignoramus like me. It can't have been that difficult for Lloyds to have seen coming.
If your family trading company had a couple of million sat in UK bank and savings accounts (waiting to fund a new office build), would you be taking any steps to protect it from possible UK bank failures at this point ? Maybe loan to directors who stick it straight in NS&I and just take the deemed BIK tax consequences ? Asking for a friend.
UK retail banks are ring fenced by law which means even if the rest of the world crashes and burns UK depositor money is not accessible to them to cover capital losses elsewhere. Uninsured UK deposits can only cover losses within the UK, which as of today doesn't seem like something we're going to see. The UK banking industry is probably among the healthiest in the world, for once lessons were learned after 2008.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
I have to say watching all of this unfold is like reliving 2008 a bit. In the US we had a bank attempting to run a business model very similar to Northern Rock or RBS at well over 50:1 leverage and now in Switzerland we've got a shotgun wedding that makes Lloyds/HBOS look like brilliant strategic planning.
What I don't understand is what CS have been doing for the last 15 years and why UBS has said yes to the buyout. I'd have told the Swiss government to get fucked and that I'd look at purchasing the viable assets after insolvency.
Similar to Lloyds/HBOS, fallible people subject to political pressure, I assume ? The folly of the Lloyds deal was obvious at the time to even a relative financial ignoramus like me. It can't have been that difficult for Lloyds to have seen coming.
The Lloyds/HBOS deal seemed like a great one to me at the time.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
I have to say watching all of this unfold is like reliving 2008 a bit. In the US we had a bank attempting to run a business model very similar to Northern Rock or RBS at well over 50:1 leverage and now in Switzerland we've got a shotgun wedding that makes Lloyds/HBOS look like brilliant strategic planning.
What I don't understand is what CS have been doing for the last 15 years and why UBS has said yes to the buyout. I'd have told the Swiss government to get fucked and that I'd look at purchasing the viable assets after insolvency.
Telling your regulatory/government to “get fucked” has unpleasant consequences
What I find doubly mental this morning is that apparently CS were resisting the take over all weekend and insisting that any takeover valuation be at a premium to their Friday close.
The Swiss had a great opportunity to lance the boil and they've well and truly fucked it. The culture it CS is said to be awful, I've heard from people who previously worked there that it was cult like and anyone who questioned the narrative that they were Switzerland's premier bank just going through a rough patch was pushed out.
UBS needs to announce that everyone from c level down to senior management should start updating their CVs. Don't let the delusional idiots get a toehold.
What I don't understand is how the Swiss government could effectively award shareholders several billion, while simultaneously wiping out a class of bondholders who (I understand) rank above shareholders ?
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
On the off chance any pollsters are lurking;
“Who do you trust more? Boris Johnson or Sue Gray?”
Would make for an interesting question.
I recon the public would split ~80/20 in favour of our Sue.
If Goodwin ran the poll:
“Who do you trust more? Well meaning victim of witch hunt Boris Johnson or friend of Keir Starmer & future Labour chief of staff Sue Gray?”
Probly still be 80/20 mind.
What on Earth was Starmer thinking, hiring Sue Gray while all this Johnson stuff was still ongoing?
It looks terrible, and is going to give the Tories the opportunity to question the timeline, in an attempt to discredit her as a political stooge.
In the world of 3D chess Sue Gray is a pawn. She’s been played.
It stirs up the mess on the Tory side and costs Starmer nothing
What’s the betting she never actually takes up her position?
An interesting angle, but I don’t think Starmer plays even regular 2D chess.
Starmer and Gray have known each other for ages, IMHO his CS background suggests he just didn’t see the potential political issues with the hire.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
I have to say watching all of this unfold is like reliving 2008 a bit. In the US we had a bank attempting to run a business model very similar to Northern Rock or RBS at well over 50:1 leverage and now in Switzerland we've got a shotgun wedding that makes Lloyds/HBOS look like brilliant strategic planning.
What I don't understand is what CS have been doing for the last 15 years and why UBS has said yes to the buyout. I'd have told the Swiss government to get fucked and that I'd look at purchasing the viable assets after insolvency.
Similar to Lloyds/HBOS, fallible people subject to political pressure, I assume ? The folly of the Lloyds deal was obvious at the time to even a relative financial ignoramus like me. It can't have been that difficult for Lloyds to have seen coming.
They were put under immense political pressure by Gordon Brown and Alastair Darling who didn't want two Scottish banks to be the only ones to have received a state bailout.
This is the same idiotic national pride at play wrt CS, the prudent thing to do would be to guarantee all deposits and then let the bank go insolvent over the next week and have remedies available for that and buyers lined up for the bits of CS that are still viable allowing the state to recover any losses they may have from guaranteeing depositors.
What I find doubly mental this morning is that apparently CS were resisting the take over all weekend and insisting that any takeover valuation be at a premium to their Friday close.
The Swiss had a great opportunity to lance the boil and they've well and truly fucked it. The culture it CS is said to be awful, I've heard from people who previously worked there that it was cult like and anyone who questioned the narrative that they were Switzerland's premier bank just going through a rough patch was pushed out.
UBS needs to announce that everyone from c level down to senior management should start updating their CVs. Don't let the delusional idiots get a toehold.
What I don't understand is how the Swiss government could effectively award shareholders several billion, while simultaneously wiping out a class of bondholders who (I understand) rank above shareholders ?
Shareholders have a vote
And yet letting the bank become insolvent was an option, preferable to what we have now.
Just checked into slack for 5 mins, one of our guys worked out that CS was probably worth €-18bn so UBS shares still have some way to fall.
If you have written off the bonds surely that goes down?
Hmm yes, I guess he didn't take that into account over the weekend lol.
FWIW on your justified frustration re the shareholders getting money don’t forget they actually own the business. The CoCos can be wiped by executive fiat but (short of expropriation) the shareholders have to *sell* the shares.
It’s quite common in restructuring situations to see the equity holders get something even while the bonds take a haircut - if they don’t acquiesce then you end up with an uncontrolled bankruptcy
The solution to that was always a government edict to protect depositors and then let everything else fall wherever it would fall and then the industry picks up the pieces. As long as depositors were protected the steaming carcass of CS could have chopped up and sold piece meal.
Because that worked really well with Lehman…
They should have nationalised the business (possibly even bailing in the CoCos first) and put it into run off / sold the viable pieces on an orderly manner
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
I have to say watching all of this unfold is like reliving 2008 a bit. In the US we had a bank attempting to run a business model very similar to Northern Rock or RBS at well over 50:1 leverage and now in Switzerland we've got a shotgun wedding that makes Lloyds/HBOS look like brilliant strategic planning.
What I don't understand is what CS have been doing for the last 15 years and why UBS has said yes to the buyout. I'd have told the Swiss government to get fucked and that I'd look at purchasing the viable assets after insolvency.
Telling your regulatory/government to “get fucked” has unpleasant consequences
"We're moving our HQ to London" is the response to that.
Just checked into slack for 5 mins, one of our guys worked out that CS was probably worth €-18bn so UBS shares still have some way to fall.
If you have written off the bonds surely that goes down?
Hmm yes, I guess he didn't take that into account over the weekend lol.
FWIW on your justified frustration re the shareholders getting money don’t forget they actually own the business. The CoCos can be wiped by executive fiat but (short of expropriation) the shareholders have to *sell* the shares.
It’s quite common in restructuring situations to see the equity holders get something even while the bonds take a haircut - if they don’t acquiesce then you end up with an uncontrolled bankruptcy
The Swiss government bypassed the need for shareholder approval, so that doesn't apply. The government made the decision to hand shareholders several billion at the cost of bondholders. More significantly, they thereby introduced a new doubt about the relative security of bonds, which effects every bank in the world.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
I have to say watching all of this unfold is like reliving 2008 a bit. In the US we had a bank attempting to run a business model very similar to Northern Rock or RBS at well over 50:1 leverage and now in Switzerland we've got a shotgun wedding that makes Lloyds/HBOS look like brilliant strategic planning.
What I don't understand is what CS have been doing for the last 15 years and why UBS has said yes to the buyout. I'd have told the Swiss government to get fucked and that I'd look at purchasing the viable assets after insolvency.
Similar to Lloyds/HBOS, fallible people subject to political pressure, I assume ? The folly of the Lloyds deal was obvious at the time to even a relative financial ignoramus like me. It can't have been that difficult for Lloyds to have seen coming.
There was real strategic upside for Lloyds though - they had to waive antitrust to allow the deal
With hindsight it was a bad idea, but UBS/CS was a bad idea with foresight
Just checked into slack for 5 mins, one of our guys worked out that CS was probably worth €-18bn so UBS shares still have some way to fall.
If you have written off the bonds surely that goes down?
Hmm yes, I guess he didn't take that into account over the weekend lol.
FWIW on your justified frustration re the shareholders getting money don’t forget they actually own the business. The CoCos can be wiped by executive fiat but (short of expropriation) the shareholders have to *sell* the shares.
It’s quite common in restructuring situations to see the equity holders get something even while the bonds take a haircut - if they don’t acquiesce then you end up with an uncontrolled bankruptcy
The solution to that was always a government edict to protect depositors and then let everything else fall wherever it would fall and then the industry picks up the pieces. As long as depositors were protected the steaming carcass of CS could have chopped up and sold piece meal.
Because that worked really well with Lehman…
They should have nationalised the business (possibly even bailing in the CoCos first) and put it into run off / sold the viable pieces on an orderly manner
And as someone who works in the industry I say - tough shit. The industry has had 15 years to get it's shit sorted. Pushing CS into insolvency would finally have forced some consequences on the delusional morons who are running banks as though they were still in the mid 2000s.
Just checked into slack for 5 mins, one of our guys worked out that CS was probably worth €-18bn so UBS shares still have some way to fall.
If you have written off the bonds surely that goes down?
Hmm yes, I guess he didn't take that into account over the weekend lol.
FWIW on your justified frustration re the shareholders getting money don’t forget they actually own the business. The CoCos can be wiped by executive fiat but (short of expropriation) the shareholders have to *sell* the shares.
It’s quite common in restructuring situations to see the equity holders get something even while the bonds take a haircut - if they don’t acquiesce then you end up with an uncontrolled bankruptcy
The Swiss government bypassed the need for shareholder approval, so that doesn't apply. The government made the decision to hand shareholders several billion at the cost of bondholders. More significantly, they thereby introduced a new doubt about the relative security of bonds, which effects every bank in the world.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
I've just been told to stay on stand by in case I need to come home, right now there's no need as most of our clients are VC backed rather than debt funded but this could get very messy.
Very messy.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
I have to say watching all of this unfold is like reliving 2008 a bit. In the US we had a bank attempting to run a business model very similar to Northern Rock or RBS at well over 50:1 leverage and now in Switzerland we've got a shotgun wedding that makes Lloyds/HBOS look like brilliant strategic planning.
What I don't understand is what CS have been doing for the last 15 years and why UBS has said yes to the buyout. I'd have told the Swiss government to get fucked and that I'd look at purchasing the viable assets after insolvency.
Telling your regulatory/government to “get fucked” has unpleasant consequences
"We're moving our HQ to London" is the response to that.
Weren't you thinking about moving to Switzerland a year or so ago? Maybe just as well you didn't.
UK gas futures have fallen to under 100p per therm, the lowest they have been since Russia invaded Ukraine. The linkage between these prices and the cost of fuel is somewhat opaque but the cost of extending the price guarantee may prove to be minimal for the government. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cxwdwz5d8gxt/natural-gas
Needs the price of electricity to come down to help many of us. Since the government has been pushing for people to switch away from fossil fuels toward renewable electricity via ASHPs for heating, they cannot leave those who have taken that step high and dry. Just saying.
The price for electricity has largely been fixed by the price for gas since gas fired power stations have been providing about 40% of our power. My understanding is that some other supplies, such as wind, are generating windfall (ha) profits at the moment selling into that market.
Yes. The marginal unit of electricity is supplied by gas power stations most of the time, and so the price of gas sets the price of electricity.
If your family trading company had a couple of million sat in UK bank and savings accounts (waiting to fund a new office build), would you be taking any steps to protect it from possible UK bank failures at this point ? Maybe loan to directors who stick it straight in NS&I and just take the deemed BIK tax consequences ? Asking for a friend.
For different reasons (interest rates) many moons ago I asked HMRC if it was ok for me to hold company funds without it being a loan. I was given the ok provided there was a written agreement (sent to HMRC) between me and my company (easy) and the company declared the interest.
It worked fine. The only issue was my personal tax return was questioned. I was repeatedly asked if I had declared everything, which I confirmed I had. Then it dawned on me that it looked like I wasn't declaring the interest on the money I was holding for the company (which I was of course in the company accounts). They sounded really pissed off when I could produce an agreement and letter from the tax inspector giving me permission to do this. I assume they thought they had another banged to rights only to find I was being completely honest.
And unsurprisingly that uncertainty of where bondholders sit has done nothing to calm markets, in fact it's made everything worse.
Well done Swiss government, what a fucking bang up job you've done here. Morons.
Legislating to bypass shareholders in order to force the takeover, without considering the bondholders, which seems to be the case, was a serious mistake. A fair accompli is fine when there's no concern over values (SVB UK), but otherwise it's just deferring dealing with the problem.
Probably would have been much cheaper to sort out in the medium term, if the government had just taken on the problem itself.
Well they did consider the bond holders, specifically they have said 14bn in bonds will be zeroed out while shareholders will receive 2.7bn in UBS shares. This is a disaster and bank bonds are going to crash today.
I think I may get called home this afternoon. So thank you very much Switzerland.
I'm trying to think this through. Is it possible that there were other Swiss financial institutions who could be at risk if their shareholding in Credit Suisse was suddenly worthless so this is a back door way of keeping them solvent?
I wondered if it was a way of being 'nice' to the Saudi's who attempted to bail them out a few months ago and have lost their shirt.
What I find doubly mental this morning is that apparently CS were resisting the take over all weekend and insisting that any takeover valuation be at a premium to their Friday close.
The Swiss had a great opportunity to lance the boil and they've well and truly fucked it. The culture it CS is said to be awful, I've heard from people who previously worked there that it was cult like and anyone who questioned the narrative that they were Switzerland's premier bank just going through a rough patch was pushed out.
UBS needs to announce that everyone from c level down to senior management should start updating their CVs. Don't let the delusional idiots get a toehold.
What I don't understand is how the Swiss government could effectively award shareholders several billion, while simultaneously wiping out a class of bondholders who (I understand) rank above shareholders ?
Nobody does yet. Everyone is still scratching their heads waiting for the Swiss government to break cover on the reasoning behind bailing out equity holders and wiping out debt holders. It seems, on the face of it, an insane decision and Swiss corporate financing is going to become much more expensive as bondholders will now ask for a risk premium, especially on bank bonds, and we know those aren't important at all for banks to fund their operations. Not at all.
Seems mad to change the rules on a whim. Now no-one knows where they stand. The uncertainty is the last thing that is needed.
An apparent inflation rate over 20%. For significant parts of the country, life is becoming increasingly precarious.
Cost of living: 'I never thought I'd be sofa-surfing at 74' https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-stoke-staffordshire-64983317 ...The letting agency has seen average rents increase from £989 per calendar month in January 2022, to £1,241 this January, yet there is no let-up in demand...
Housing: if you own outright in this country you have reached the promised land. If you have a mortgage then you keep everything crossed that you don't get laid off - or that your wages don't fall so low that you can no longer afford to service it. If you rent then, unless you're lucky enough to be in social housing with a good provider, you are up the proverbial without a paddle.
That septuagenarian who's sofa surfing is the harbinger of many millions in decades to come - have nots who couldn't afford to buy will be working til they drop to service extortionate rents, before ending up in hostels or sleeping rough in their 70s and 80s. A wholly avoidable humanitarian crisis, deliberately generated by Government policy.
If that does happen then there will be (eventually) a left-wing government that turns property rights on its head and probably drives capital flight out of the country and a broader economic collapse.
The next government must must must do something about the affordability of property.
Most Conservative councils in the Home counties have produced Local Plans allowing for thousands more new houses to be developed.
The main opposition to new housing comes from Residents' Associations, Independents and the Liberal Democrats not the Conservatives. See Chesham and Amersham and this ultra Nimby LD councillor
If your family trading company had a couple of million sat in UK bank and savings accounts (waiting to fund a new office build), would you be taking any steps to protect it from possible UK bank failures at this point ? Maybe loan to directors who stick it straight in NS&I and just take the deemed BIK tax consequences ? Asking for a friend.
Companies can buy government securities themselves.
Listening to the news this morning I expect this week is going to be very dramatic and it looks as if Johnson has Harriet Harman and Sue Gray in his sights
Kay Burley said that Sue Gray was talking to Labour at the same time as she was advising the committee looking into Johnson and it doesn't look good (her words, not mine)
I have no respect for Johnson whatsoever and would be delighted if he faced a recall but this is going to be hugely controversial
Be hilarious if Boris gets the boot but Starmer has blasted away at his own feet with heavy-calibre weaponry because of Sue Gray's appointment (and his very weasally words about the timing).
Sooner or later Johnson's clique are going to need to specify exactly what was incorrect/biased in Gray's report.
AFAIK very little has been offered so far. Johnson is lashing out attacking the integrity of the process because it is the only strategy he has left.
Our village hall committee have tasked me with the challenge of replacing our old Queen Elizabeth photo with one of KC ahead of the Coronation. Is there an official one I can download?
Any (polite) suggestions, anyone?
They official replacement hasnt been released yet is my understanding.
Britain’s biggest police force faces being broken up if it does not rapidly overhaul a toxic culture that will be exposed in an independent report tomorrow, The Times has learnt.
Baroness Casey of Blackstock’s excoriating review — ordered after Sarah Everard was abducted, raped and murdered by the serving Metropolitan Police officer Wayne Couzens in 2021 — found institutional problems of sexism, racism and homophobia.
Casey is expected to detail a culture of bullying, officers being placed under unbearable work pressure and a failure of the Met’s leadership to get to grips with a series of misconduct scandals.
Whitehall sources said that the 300-page report was “do or die” for the Met, revealing that Casey had made a series of hard-hitting recommendations with the requirement that progress be monitored by a new oversight board, led by the mayor of London. They said the option was left open for more radical reform, including structural changes, if a drastic overhaul did not occur.
There have long been calls for more specialist areas, such as the national counter-terrorism command, to be split off and subsumed by the National Crime Agency to allow the Met to get to grips with policing London.
One source said “nothing is off the table” in the long term but added that it was crucial to give Sir Mark Rowley, who took over as the Met commissioner in September, time for reforms.
Casey is understood to have uncovered widespread failings in every department she examined, including the parliamentary and diplomatic protection command. She will recommend that the unit, in which Couzens and the serial sex offender David Carrick both served, be “effectively disbanded”.
Isn't there a crisis in policing across the country? Can you name a single force that has a stellar reputstion?
The Met is one of five forces in special measures. My own county force, Gloucestershire, is one of them, and having had some dealings with them recently I find that far from surprising.
The whole police system across the country needs a thorough shake up. Step forward...
Suella Braverman?
Gloucestershire police could cut crime in half tomorrow just by committing rather less of it.
As for the Met how many bloody chances does it need? Enough already. Break it up into five different forces each with their own Commissioner, Police Authority and PCC. That’s been needed for over 100 years.
And at the same time, change the rules on disciplinary procedures so they are completed whether you resign or not (and that could be usefully applied in other fields as well, the way it is in teaching).
How the flip would breaking up the Met help? Something needs to be done; breaking up the Met is something; therefore... But no word on how things will change along with the cap badge. Will the sub-Mets magically become better at policing, and less corrupt? I doubt it. No mechanism is offered. The government has no idea and a reorganisation will disguise that.
Nice as it is to see Louise Casey say what I have been saying - repeatedly, on here - for the last 4 years, another report saying the same things that lots of others have said is not the solution. The previous 7 (by my count) reports have been ignored. Why will this one be any different?
Comments
Steroids often form part of cancer treatment...
There is a reason, in my own field, why private schools are generally small and state school that get into trouble are often very large.
It's not a cast iron rule - I've known terrible small organisations and brilliant larger ones - but it seems to happen too often to be a coincidence.
It would also reduce the opportunities for people to transfer away before problems emerge. Although that requires wider reform of police disciplinary processes.
It also confuses the management and leads them to focus on too many things at once, becoming a Jack of all trades and master of none, a la OFSTED.
You can imagine that a national counter terrorism agency, a diplomatic protection squad, a properly organised National Crime Agency taking over the met's functions there and a dedicated local police force for London - or even two - would help, if it were a reorganisation properly managed and intelligently worked out.
The last part of course is the snag...
The committee has already stated explicitly that it is not relying on the Gray report.
And in any event, the matters of fact in the report stand in their own merits.
Johnson's tactics in this case are remarkably Trumpian.
I think I may get called home this afternoon. So thank you very much Switzerland.
It usually ends with somebody in A&E with a sex toy stuffed somewhere improbable.
And he gets lots of free publicity for it.
Should he have done it? Probably not. Will he be unhappy? Definitely not...
If they do that they've achieved the impossible. They've been even stupider than I thought.
Bottom line is he is trying to argue the difference between misleading and knowingly misleading (regardless of whether the committe is interested in the distinction), since the former has already been proven.
He has 2 options to argue: that he is a titanic fool who literally could not understand what was happening in front of his face, and throwing out complex legal claims as a distraction so people can act as though there is a beyond reasonable doubt standard of proof to sanction him.
The man is a liar and has long gotten away with lying. He's now wailing because that reputation of being a liar is finally affecting his credibility when he claims this time he's being truthful.
By allowing banks to borrow directly from the central bank they reduce the risk of a sudden run on a bank tipping it into insolvency but they do so by nationalising the risk. This policy is 2008 redux but I am seeing very little sign that we face systemic risks right now. Some banks, allegedly including HSBC, will have taken a bath on money owed by Credit Suisse but we are not seeing a lot of evidence of banks being unwilling to lend to each other as we did in 2008.
This "cure" seems to positively encourage the disease to me, by addressing problems that don't exist it scares people into thinking they do.
The ear look pretty much identical to me.
F1: farcical podium hokey-cokey sees Alonso get it back.
https://www.formula1.com/en/latest/article.breaking-fernando-alonsos-saudi-arabian-grand-prix-podium-reinstated-after.1QaHGAtZu9W5k6nYsnR1id.html
I did hope that we might get more than 15 years between banking crises.
Incidentally, do you recall what were the odds on no safety car, prior to the race?
I’ve seen that UBS/CS deal.
My job just got a lot more difficult.
I think I’ll move into a career with less stress and downsides such as bomb disposal.
Our village hall committee have tasked me with the challenge of replacing our old Queen Elizabeth photo with one of KC ahead of the Coronation. Is there an official one I can download?
Any (polite) suggestions, anyone?
It did seem unnecessary.
Pity for Stroll. Despite his hand woe he's been driving well.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/topics/cxwdwz5d8gxt/natural-gas
I don’t think the Labour Party in Uxbridge can start collecting signatures yet for a recall petition.
And good morning to all; grey and somewhat damp, here.
The Swiss had a great opportunity to lance the boil and they've well and truly fucked it. The culture it CS is said to be awful, I've heard from people who previously worked there that it was cult like and anyone who questioned the narrative that they were Switzerland's premier bank just going through a rough patch was pushed out.
UBS needs to announce that everyone from c level down to senior management should start updating their CVs. Don't let the delusional idiots get a toehold.
The Swiss have put national pride over good corporate strategy.
This will not end well.
They’ll learn this lesson the hard way and have to rely on chocolates for their tax coffers.
𝐌𝐎𝐑𝐓 𝐀𝐔𝐗 𝐑𝐎𝐈𝐒
NEW: Westminster Voting Intention poll (17 Mar):
🔴 LAB: 45% (+3 from 8 Mar)
🔵 CON: 20% (-3)
🟢 GRN: 13% (+3)
🟠 LDM: 9% (+1)
🟣 RFM: 6% (-1)
🟡 SNP: 5% (+1)
https://twitter.com/PeoplePolling/status/1637704949965500418?s=20
What I don't understand is what CS have been doing for the last 15 years and why UBS has said yes to the buyout. I'd have told the Swiss government to get fucked and that I'd look at purchasing the viable assets after insolvency.
How controversial the outcome is will depend on how the vote splits. If the committee all believe he is guilty it is going to be difficult to paint it as an opposition stitch up. lf it splits on party lines the Tories will then be open to the same accusation as they were in the Owen Paterson case.
Whatever parliament decides I think a large majority of the public have already concluded that Johnson is an inveterate liar so most will be predisposed to believe that anything he comes up with this week will be another batch of lies to try to save his own miserable neck. I do wonder how many Tory MPs would privately like to see the back of him.
Mondelez International, the U.S. company that owns Toblerone, is shifting part of its production to Slovakia starting in July, in a move announced last year aimed at cutting costs.
That appears to violate Switzerland's "Swissness Act," which since 2017 has required products to meet certain criteria in order to use Swiss symbols (like the Swiss cross) or call themselves Swiss-made.
https://www.npr.org/2023/03/06/1161259572/toblerone-matterhorn-packaging-swissness
There are more right wingers than that in GB.
Surely?
It’s quite common in restructuring situations to see the equity holders get something even while the bonds take a haircut - if they don’t acquiesce then you end up with an uncontrolled bankruptcy
It stirs up the mess on the Tory side and costs Starmer nothing
What’s the betting she never actually takes up her position?
Which of the following would be best to manage the British economy in the years ahead?
A Conservative government with Rishi Sunak as Prime Minister: 17%
A Labour government with Keir Starmer as Prime Minister: 30%
https://peoplepolling.org/tables/202303_GBN_W11_full.pdf#subsection*.12
(I was going to say “consensual” but… 😂 )
Seriously though, SNP up 1 is a surprise.
I’ll leave it to you to choose…
The folly of the Lloyds deal was obvious at the time to even a relative financial ignoramus like me. It can't have been that difficult for Lloyds to have seen coming.
But then, I was working for HBOS.
Starmer and Gray have known each other for ages, IMHO his CS background suggests he just didn’t see the potential political issues with the hire.
This is the same idiotic national pride at play wrt CS, the prudent thing to do would be to guarantee all deposits and then let the bank go insolvent over the next week and have remedies available for that and buyers lined up for the bits of CS that are still viable allowing the state to recover any losses they may have from guaranteeing depositors.
They should have nationalised the business (possibly even bailing in the CoCos first) and put it into run off / sold the viable pieces on an orderly manner
The government made the decision to hand shareholders several billion at the cost of bondholders.
More significantly, they thereby introduced a new doubt about the relative security of bonds, which effects every bank in the world.
With hindsight it was a bad idea, but UBS/CS was a bad idea with foresight
It worked fine. The only issue was my personal tax return was questioned. I was repeatedly asked if I had declared everything, which I confirmed I had. Then it dawned on me that it looked like I wasn't declaring the interest on the money I was holding for the company (which I was of course in the company accounts). They sounded really pissed off when I could produce an agreement and letter from the tax inspector giving me permission to do this. I assume they thought they had another banged to rights only to find I was being completely honest.
NS&I is just a consumer friendly way of doing it.
AFAIK very little has been offered so far. Johnson is lashing out attacking the integrity of the process because it is the only strategy he has left.
Here are my suggestions from over a year ago - https://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2022/02/11/what-should-the-met-do-now/