How do you feel about AIB spending YOUR tax money to promote itself on TV?

jetsonx

As we all know, AIB if left to its own devices should of went bust a couple of months ago.

But now, with the company being propped up with taxpayers money, they now insult us even further by spending it on TV advertisements telling us how great they are.

So how angry do you feel, when you see one of their TV advertisments?

MagicMarker

Eh, marketing is quite important.

Diabhal Beag

Not happy

minidazzler

I don't feel angry at all.

o1s1n

MagicMarker wrote: »

Eh, marketing is quite important.

Indeed.

And nothing does us all better than the collective hate of some random woman from Terenure.

markok84

meh, my account with them is overdrawn and I'm unemployed.... I'd like to see them make a feel good ad about that!

phasers

I wish they'd spent my tax money on killing that bitch from Terenure

Overheal

Awwwww you're like a little America. Its precious.

At least its Marketing and not a multimillion dollar adspot that says "Hi guys thanks for your bailout money we're going to spend it good".

I cant remember which CEO that was. ****ing tool.

Placid_Casual

So angry! How dare those bastards spend money on running a business.

G_R

so would you rather they didn't try to drum up interest in their business and just used tax payers money to run it forever instead

god some people just need something to moan about

Overheal

Need to spend money to make money.

Huggles

I can't believe in this day and age some people still don't understand how banks work.

jos28

I get angry when I think of my taxes going to AIB who have somwhere between €40 million to €100 million's worth of paintings adorning their office walls. Sell them and bail yourselves out :mad:

Overheal

jos28 wrote: »

I get angry when I think of my taxes going to AIB who have somwhere between €40 million to €100 million's worth of paintings adorning their office walls. Sell them and bail yourselves out :mad:

Paintings can be investments you know. And you kind of made the point yourself, if they need to they can auction the paintings to get their money back, or actually make money on the sale of the paintings.

orourkeda

Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage

partyatmygaff

jos28 wrote: »

I get angry when I think of my taxes going to AIB who have somwhere between €40 million to €100 million's worth of paintings adorning their office walls. Sell them and bail yourselves out :mad:

Quite obviously you do not understand how banks work, those paintings are ASSETS used as security for loans from the ecb, other banks etc.
They CANNOT sell them as a bank without security is going to fail badly.

Its not just there so the CEO feels his offices are stylish.

G_R

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Quite obviously you do not understand how banks work, those paintings are ASSETS used as security for loans from the ecb, other banks etc.
They CANNOT sell them as a bank without security is going to fail badly.

Its not just there so the CEO feels his offices are stylish.

oh course they can, its not like they live in the real world or anything:rolleyes:

hello932

That bitch will die in Terenure! :)Hate that ad so much.

rotinaj

I m shocked!! Shocked and appalled. And dont get me started an them gangsters on the dole spending MY tax money on food and the like. All quite shocking really.

stepbar

God it's a real slow sunday eh?...........:rolleyes:

My name is URL

Huggles wrote: »

I can't believe in this day and age some people still don't understand how banks work.

Yeah it's ridiculous, and then these people are put in charge of the bloody things!

Gator

What proof do you have that it was goverment money and not revenue?

Huggles

The lads in charge know exactly how they work, things coming to light in the last year are down to basic greed.

My name is URL wrote: »

Yeah it's ridiculous, and then these people are put in charge of the bloody things!

My name is URL

Huggles wrote: »

The lads in charge know exactly how they work, things coming to light in the last year are down to basic greed.

Greed which was fueled by the banks willingness to grant loans to high-risk individuals

Huggles

Agreed but its a bit ridiculous starting a thread about a companies marketing practice no?

My name is URL wrote: »

Greed which was fueled by the banks willingness to grant loans to high-risk individuals

My name is URL

Huggles wrote: »

Agreed but its a bit ridiculous starting a thread about a companies marketing practice no?

Definitely!

It should have been about Mary Harney's €750,000 air travel expenses which she managed to rack up in just 2 years :P

Jesus

Huggles

I've come to the conclusion in the last week though that there is no point ranting anymore. Ireland will still have gob****es that are pro FF. Might as well be pissing in the wind.

My name is URL wrote: »

Definitely!

It should have been about Mary Harney's €750,000 air travel expenses which she managed to rack up in just 2 years :P

Jesus

Zebra3

Huggles wrote: »

I can't believe in this day and age some people still don't understand how banks work.

In case you've been living in a cave on Mars for the last few years, I'll update you.

The banks don't work. That's the problem.

I'm more pised off with the fcking cnts who are giving them our money in the first place. :mad::mad::mad:

And the Irish people just take it like the bitches that they are.

Imagine what the reaction would be in France....

dotsman

Has everybody been asleep for the last year? Has everyone just woken up now, read a tabloid and thought to themselves that somehow the banks have been "given" "your money"?

Not one cent of taxpayer's money has been given to the banks. It is, in fact, the opposite , with the banks now paying the exchequer huge amounts of money every year (which is being used to pay our ridiculous social welfare and public sector pay levels).

The recapitalisation and now NAMA are all funded via bonds issued by NTMA. It has nothing (well, very little) to do with our taxes/budget deficit. The purpose of this is to get hard assets on the books of our banks as they are temporarily paralysed by the collapse of the property market and thus, get credit flowing through our economy again.

dr.bollocko

Once upon a time, a woman was picking up firewood. She came upon a poisonous snake frozen in the snow. She took the snake home and nursed it back to health. One day the snake bit her on the cheek. As she lay dying, she asked the snake, "Why have you done this to me?" And the snake answered, "Look, bitch, you knew I was a snake."

eth0_

Overheal wrote: »

Paintings can be investments you know. And you kind of made the point yourself, if they need to they can auction the paintings to get their money back, or actually make money on the sale of the paintings.

Generally an investment is something that you sell at some point, making a profit or return on your investment.

I've also heard that AIB own art worth an absolute fortune - WHY were they government so quick to dole out taxpayers' money instead of first telling AIB to sell assets such as their art collection first??

trout

From what I've heard the art collection is largely owned by the pension fund, and as such, it is not an asset.

How much tax-payers money has been "doled out" to the banks ? Is there something other than the temporary state guarantee of deposits in place ?

drkpower

eth0_ wrote: »

Generally an investment is something that you sell at some point, making a profit or return on your investment.

I've also heard that AIB own art worth an absolute fortune - WHY were they government so quick to dole out taxpayers' money instead of first telling AIB to sell assets such as their art collection first??

Was their art collection worth €3.5 billion?

Look, the bank bailouts leave a bitter taste in everyone's mouth. But if there are alternative solutions or different ways to manage the crisis, lets hear them Rather than silly uninformed sniping about art collections and advertising.

MonkeyTennis

the horrible truth is nobody cares. we are a society utterly immune to getting ***ed over.

stovelid

While I'm angry about them being bailed out, it's obvious that the bailout money will be used for them to operate as a business, including marketing.

So I'm angry overall, but don't have the energy to dissipate it into micro-amounts of anger every time that I see an AIB advert, leaflet or shopfront.

Jet Black

Them baxterds should rot in hell,rabble rabble.... bank bailouts... rabble rabble........ government are thick.....rabble rabble...... NAMA!!!! Where is my bailout FFS!!!!

amovingstatue

Mask wrote: »

Them baxterds should rot in hell,rabble rabble.... bank bailouts... rabble rabble........ government are thick.....rabble rabble...... NAMA!!!! Where is my bailout FFS!!!!

you're not important

RMD

If they want to make a profit and get some customers back, spending our money on marketing / advertising is actually quite important as it will make more than they spend if done even half right.

Marketing is a key part for a company to make money, giving AIB all that money without them marketing to regain customers would be idiotic OP, no offense.

In All Fairness

drkpower wrote: »

Was their art collection worth €3.5 billion?

Look, the bank bailouts leave a bitter taste in everyone's mouth. But if there are alternative solutions or different ways to manage the crisis, lets hear them Rather than silly uninformed sniping about art collections and advertising.

All of the banks should have been put into examinership as would have happened with any other business. The government didn't want to do this as the examiner would not have been either a bank or government employee and would have been obliged to disclose all wrongdoing by both the government and the boards of the banks.

Had they been put into examinership the share value would have been zero and the executives of both banks would have been removed. They would not have been able to hide, with government help, their actions.

Instead taxpayer's money was used to keep the banks afloat and the cosy little cartel of professional "directors" in place.

Had they been put into examinership the state could have bought the banks for €1 as happened with Baring's. Then they could have installed their own board ensuring any capital invested by the taxpayer went to providing credit rather than bolstering the balance sheet of corrupt institutions.

I can assure you any bank board would be far more scared of a commercial examiner than any government lackey like the financial regulator. The banks were kept afloat by the government so their mates's deeds wouldn't come to light. It's organised crime between Leinster House and their buddies and they are using public funds to pervert the course of justice and defy investigation.

Jet Black

amovingstatue wrote: »

you're not important

Intersting point

drkpower

In All Fairness wrote: »

All of the banks should have been put into examinership as would have happened with any other business. The government didn't want to do this as the examiner would not have been either a bank or government employee and would have been obliged to disclose all wrongdoing by both the government and the boards of the banks.

Had they been put into examinership the share value would have been zero and the executives of both banks would have been removed. They would not have been able to hide, with government help, their actions.

Instead taxpayer's money was used to keep the banks afloat and the cosy little cartel of professional "directors" in place.

Had they been put into examinership the state could have bought the banks for €1 as happened with Baring's. Then they could have installed their own board ensuring any capital invested by the taxpayer went to providing credit rather than bolstering the balance sheet of corrupt institutions.

I can assure you any bank board would be far more scared of a commercial examiner than any government lackey like the financial regulator. The banks were kept afloat by the government so their mates's deeds wouldn't come to light. It's organised crime between Leinster House and their buddies and they are using public funds to pervert the course of justice and defy investigation.

So much detail, so many innacuracies!

First, the State wouldnt have put them into examinership, they would have just nationalised the bank. And that wouldnt have even cost €1, it would have been free!!

Second, even if it was nationalised the debts are still there - they still have to be dealt with.

Third, where do you get the idea that an examiner would have been obliged to disclose all wrongdoing by both the government and the boards of the banks. And what do you mean by "wrongdoing"? Is that a moral, ethical or legal "wrongdoing"?

Fourth, an examiner doesnt perform an investigation into "organised crime", the Gardai do that and they have every oppportunity to do so.

galwayrush

I just want my share of the money back.:(

galwayrush

galwayrush wrote: »

I just want my share of the money back.:(

how much do you think that is roughly? out of interest..

Purple Gorilla

Overheal wrote: »

Awwwww you're like a little America. Its precious.

At least its Marketing and not a multimillion dollar adspot that says "Hi guys thanks for your bailout money we're going to spend it good".

I cant remember which CEO that was. ****ing tool.

http://theangryhedgehog.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/aib-trib3.jpg?w=600&h=800

galwayrush

Deleted User wrote: »

how much do you think that is roughly? out of interest..

No idea, i'm just broke, could do with a little help from anywhere.:p

Jumpy

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Once upon a time, a woman was picking up firewood. She came upon a poisonous snake frozen in the snow. She took the snake home and nursed it back to health. One day the snake bit her on the cheek. As she lay dying, she asked the snake, "Why have you done this to me?" And the snake answered, "Look, bitch, you knew I was a snake."

Aww, the Scorpion and the Frog translated into AH. How sweet.

stovelid

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Once upon a time, a woman was picking up firewood. She came upon a poisonous snake frozen in the snow. She took the snake home and nursed it back to health. One day the snake bit her on the cheek. As she lay dying, she asked the snake, "Why have you done this to me?" And the snake answered, "Look, bitch, you knew I was a snake."

Prefer it with music... :cool:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_ZBqpEUbik

The_Minister

dr.bollocko wrote: »

Once upon a time, a woman was picking up firewood. She came upon a poisonous snake frozen in the snow. She took the snake home and nursed it back to health. One day the snake bit her on the cheek. As she lay dying, she asked the snake, "Why have you done this to me?" And the snake answered, "Look, bitch, you knew I was a snake."

*Cough*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2p8o77xJEI

Much better.

Overheal

Dr. Bollocko: Closet Trekkie.

In All Fairness

drkpower wrote: »

So much detail, so many innacuracies!

First, the State wouldnt have put them into examinership, they would have just nationalised the bank. And that wouldnt have even cost €1, it would have been free!!

Second, even if it was nationalised the debts are still there - they still have to be dealt with.

Third, where do you get the idea that an examiner would have been obliged to disclose all wrongdoing by both the government and the boards of the banks. And what do you mean by "wrongdoing"? Is that a moral, ethical or legal "wrongdoing"?

Fourth, an examiner doesnt perform an investigation into "organised crime", the Gardai do that and they have every oppportunity to do so.

So much sh1te. So many inaccuracies.

First. The state wouldn't have put them into examinership, their creditors would have. Then it would be up to the courts not Leinster House. Liam Carroll is fcuked because ACC can't be silenced by the Govt.

Second. The debts of these banks is not the responsibility of the Govt. It is the responsibility of the bondholders and shareholders.

Third. The responsibility of an examiner is to his accounting company and to the courts and creditors, not to the voters, the govt. or the ex-shareholders.

Fourth. It is the examiner's obligation to see if there has been any wrongdoing, creative accounting, etc. just like an auditor. The guards will investigate as much as is good for them. Leinster House pays their wages.

Do you think that an examiner appointed to Anglo Irish wouldn't have made a statement by now? It was nationalised to stop the creditors making waves because this way they get paid by the taxpayer instead of recovering 10% at law.

Stop being so naive.

dr.bollocko

The_Minister wrote: »

*Cough*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l2p8o77xJEI

Much better.

My quote was actually directly lifted from Natural born killers and not from Star Trek. :P