Jump to content

The Finance Thread


SillyBilly

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, bigbadbob said:

No I don't  believe you voted out to feather your own nest, I was just having the craic. I actually spent 20 odd years in banking myself. Pension wise I have a couple of old company schemes but also have my own "retirement provision" so don't pay anyone to do my dirty work for piss poor performance but I do appreciate your concern. yes I have read your EU posts. I'm not ratty but I have just opened a bottle of wine to relax myself even more. up the ramps 

20 years in banking, some rich craic! :p I had done a bottle of scotch by 2am last night. And I am just starting up again...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 1.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

So, after all the talk of interest rate rises from BoE to scare people (which personally I welcomed), the very first noises out of the BoE after Brexit were hints at further accommodative monetary policy i.e. cuts to 0%. Politicized w**kers, get rid.

Will see how the dust settles in a couple of weeks and the pressure on sterling before we actually know what will happen.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Deutsche Bank: World's most dangerous bank?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36723034

Deutsche Bank shares hit a new record low today. Its value has halved since the beginning of the year.

So is it now the most dangerous bank in the world?

According to the International Monetary Fund - yes.

Last week, the IMF said that, of the banks big enough to bring the financial system crashing down, Deutsche Bank was the riskiest. Not only that, Deutsche Bank's US unit was one of only two of 33 big banks to fail tests of financial strength set by the US central bank earlier this year.

It's not hard to get scared when you look at a few numbers. Bear with me.

In simple terms any bank is worth the difference between what it's owed and what it owes. In the case of Deutsche Bank that means the difference between assets of 1.64 trillion euros (yes, trillion) and liabilities of 1.58 trillion euros. Its net value is 60 billion euros.

Sounds like a lot. BUT the value of what its owed doesn't need to move by much to wipe out its value completely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/07/2016 at 09:47, LesterRam said:

Deutsche Bank: World's most dangerous bank?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36723034

Deutsche Bank shares hit a new record low today. Its value has halved since the beginning of the year.

So is it now the most dangerous bank in the world?

According to the International Monetary Fund - yes.

Last week, the IMF said that, of the banks big enough to bring the financial system crashing down, Deutsche Bank was the riskiest. Not only that, Deutsche Bank's US unit was one of only two of 33 big banks to fail tests of financial strength set by the US central bank earlier this year.

It's not hard to get scared when you look at a few numbers. Bear with me.

In simple terms any bank is worth the difference between what it's owed and what it owes. In the case of Deutsche Bank that means the difference between assets of 1.64 trillion euros (yes, trillion) and liabilities of 1.58 trillion euros. Its net value is 60 billion euros.

Sounds like a lot. BUT the value of what its owed doesn't need to move by much to wipe out its value completely.

Or even a relatively small % write down on assets gives them a net value of below 0. The question is are the books being cooked to show solvency? European banks have been rolling over bad debt for years, particularly since the financial crisis.

Be a test for Germany if Deutsche hits trouble, I am sure Greece/Spain/Italy would be interested how the Germans react to a financial crisis on their own doorstep, would they play by their own rules? 

We currently have Renzi pointing fingers at the Brits and Germans to deflect away any responsibility for the mess Italian banks are in. Things feel very fragile in Europe at the moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 24 June 2016 at 11:17, StivePesley said:

Anyone have any views on how long Sterling will stay this weak?

Just done the sums on my 2 week holiday in August and it's going to cost me £200 more in spending money if the £ doesn't bounce back any time soon.

First time I've looked at this thread a few weeks and spotted this. Had you have feared the worst on sterling and bought a 1oz Gold Britannia the day before for around £850, you would have got that back instantly the following couple of weeks.

Wouldn't have been a bad hedge eh.

1 hour ago, SillyBilly said:

Be a test for Germany if Deutsche hits trouble, I am sure Greece/Spain/Italy would be interested how the Germans react to a financial crisis on their own doorstep, would they play by their own rules? 

We currently have Renzi pointing fingers at the Brits and Germans to deflect away any responsibility for the mess Italian banks are in. Things feel very fragile in Europe at the moment.

Now just picking up on your D.B musings, did you see their chief economist calling for €150 billion liquidity measures to be pumped into distressed E.U banks? One can only assume he was pleading for most of it to come the way of D.B :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zag zig said:

First time I've looked at this thread a few weeks and spotted this. Had you have feared the worst on sterling and bought a 1oz Gold Britannia the day before for around £850, you would have got that back instantly the following couple of weeks.

Wouldn't have been a bad hedge eh.

Now just picking up on your D.B musings, did you see their chief economist calling for €150 billion liquidity measures to be pumped into distressed E.U banks? One can only assume he was pleading for most of it to come the way of D.B :lol:

Yes, though 150 billion euros begins to look like chicken feed when the counter party to $75 trillion worth of derivatives bets disappears! It is almost unfathomable how a bank like DB can be allowed to even be in this position. Too big to fail doesn't touch it.

While not wholly attributable to central bank policy by any means, this is another contributory effect of low or negative interest rates IMO (recognise DB is not much of a retail lender). Squeeze banks on their retail margins, extirpate the margin between their lending and deposit rates then what are they going to do? As they always do...come up with ever more complex and risky instruments to make money in their investment divisions. Quelle surprise. Negative rates is directly leading to the casino economy as yield becomes ever more elusive...not the intended effect of reducing the savings rate to stimulate the economy, that is going up!  And all the while they are stoking a future pension crisis as it is government debt the pension funds are holding!

I am probably the most cautious I have ever been atm, testament to that is I am currently looking at a 7-10 year US treasuries fund (can see yield going below 1% when the SHTF in Europe) as a short term shelter. Gives exposure to the dollar and I think it is last man standing material. The way I see it, no matter what the problems are in the US, it is nothing to what we have in Europe IMO; that simple premise to me says hedging towards the US is the safest bet for now. They don't have the Euro. They have a debt market everybody can understand. They don't have anywhere near the political instability, Trump is not an existential threat. 3 massive positives in today's world!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, SillyBilly said:

Yes, though 150 billion euros begins to look like chicken feed when the counter party to $75 trillion worth of derivatives bets disappears! It is almost unfathomable how a bank like DB can be allowed to even be in this position. Too big to fail doesn't touch it.

While not wholly attributable to central bank policy by any means, this is another contributory effect of low or negative interest rates IMO (recognise DB is not much of a retail lender). Squeeze banks on their retail margins, extirpate the margin between their lending and deposit rates then what are they going to do? As they always do...come up with ever more complex and risky instruments to make money in their investment divisions. Quelle surprise. Negative rates is directly leading to the casino economy as yield becomes ever more elusive...not the intended effect of reducing the savings rate to stimulate the economy, that is going up!  And all the while they are stoking a future pension crisis as it is government debt the pension funds are holding!

I am probably the most cautious I have ever been atm, testament to that is I am currently looking at a 7-10 year US treasuries fund (can see yield going below 1% when the SHTF in Europe) as a short term shelter. Gives exposure to the dollar and I think it is last man standing material. The way I see it, no matter what the problems are in the US, it is nothing to what we have in Europe IMO; that simple premise to me says hedging towards the US is the way to go for the next couple of years. They don't have the Euro. They have a debt market everybody can understand. They don't have anywhere near the political instability, Trump is not an existential problem. 3 massive positives in today's world!

Agree S.B.

On a related theme, the FTSE only really escaped a mullering because many of the blue chips exposed to the dollar would benefit, this s a strong marker for future trading action in stocks when looking at currency effect, anyone invested in the markets should have noted this down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Zag zig said:

First time I've looked at this thread a few weeks and spotted this. Had you have feared the worst on sterling and bought a 1oz Gold Britannia the day before for around £850, you would have got that back instantly the following couple of weeks.

Wouldn't have been a bad hedge eh.

Ha - if only. Things got worse since I posted this - quite a lot worse but are now starting to rebound back to the original crappy position I was complaining about (I guess because we now actually have an agreed Prime Minister)

Silver lining though - I just realised that the only shares I own are all in Dollars and held by a US broker company so they are worth a fair bit more in £ than they were

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

UK pay: British workers see biggest fall in wages - TUC

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36903032

Workers in the UK have suffered the biggest fall in wages among the world's richest countries since the financial crisis, research has suggested.

Between 2007 and 2015 wages in the UK fell by 10.4%, a drop equalled only by Greece, the analysis by the TUC found.

Women's pay in particular needs to be boosted, the union body said. Women earn on average 19.2% less than men,according to the latest official data.

The Treasury said the TUC's analysis did not fully reflect living standards.

The UK is the joint biggest faller on pay in 29 countries of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) - a forum for wealthy countries who work together to promote financial growth and social wellbeing.

The UK, Greece and Portugal were the only three OECD countries that saw real wages fall, according to the research complied by the TUC.

At least this came out now and not before the referendum when it was released cnuts :angry:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know my vote was based on research but I feel a warm glow knowing stats issued by Mr Cameron was total b£%&#@t, I hope within time that Mr Cameron will be made accountable for his actions and the statements he released #voteleave

Also note people that quoted stats from the OECD that they never mentioned this little fact during campaigning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you combine Europe's most flexible labour market with net migration of 300,000+, you get one result - real wages adjusted for inflation being trashed.

Wages have moved nowhere and our "growth" is a total sham:

Take an average deficit over the last 5 years of c. £90b. Take an average growth rate of c. 2.5%. Take an average economy size of c. 2.6trillion.

2.5% on 2.6 = 65 billion. 90 billion borrowed to get 65 billion in growth? Stop spending the £90 billion and what would happen...the economy would cave...so you have a monetary stimulus which pays back less than its print value and you cant afford to stop it?

And c. 0.5% of the above "growth" could be accounted for by simply increasing our population by c. 0.5%. At least around a quarter of our growth comes from the simple fact we have more people in the country every year.

The last 10 years has been one long economic contraction for most people. Same in the States.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course we aren't growing. We spend all our time opening food franchises or dreaming up marketing "policies" we won't grow until we manufacture and sell to the world at a greater rate than we import. Manufacturing jobs require skill and therefore higher wages. Exported goods = national income. Consultants, merchants, total solution providers etc etc are all service industries that assist the generation of wealth but are not the generator. You can have as many step ladders as you like but you need someone to climb up them and fix the roof

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ketteringram said:

Yay! Even cheaper money. Just what's needed. 

But some of us don't want to - or need to - borrow money.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...