Anyone shouting "burn the bond holders" should read this.....

Irish Slaves for Europe

martinn123 wrote: »

Thanks for the observation,
1, I have a good idea what I am talking about
2, Deposits and debt are in fact very similar, both sources of funds are used by the Banks on a daily basis to balance the books, fund loans, mortgages etc, where do you think the money came from.
3, Michael Who?

No you really don't know what you are talking about. If Europe stopped funding our banks it would collapse the euro, they are not going to let that happen, despite all the bluster coming from the likes of Rehn and Sarkozy. Its nothing but a scare tactic put about to get the best deal for Europe, and its working so far, considering how badly Ireland's negotiating team got raped in the bailout talks. If Ireland was let go the floodgates would really open then, Portugals bond rates would skyrocket, they would need a bailout, then Spain would be next. Saving Ireland is in Europe's interest, they know it, they're just hoping we don't know it.

martinn123

Monty Burnz wrote: »

In reality, most of these bonds would be held by pension companies to provide an income to old folk who didn't want to be a burden on the state. Funny how people accept the cartoon version SF peddle with the evil speculators laughing at us inside their golden houses.

Slight correction Their Spouses Golden Houses.

PeakOutput

i used to be all about not burning the bond holders i just didnt think it would be beneficial

i am kinda 50-50 now but i just had a thought

people are saying they gambled they lost etc etc

if i understand it correctly, bond holders aren't investors they dont buy a share in a company. they basically are lending their money to the bank so the bank can use it to do its work. they are lending with the expectation of getting the money back plus interest of some sort

so my question is do you view it as the bank gambling when they give you a mortgage? or an overdraft or whatever? if you decide you cant pay those back is that just tough on the bank as they took the gamble and lost? or, should you be compelled in any legal way to pay back the bank or if you can't pay the full amount back you should be compelled to pay something back?

if my understanding of bondholders is wrong fair enough but i dont think it is

i have noticed that most of the people saying burn the bond holders would be the same people to say boo hoo to someone who took a mortgage out at the peak and is now in negative equity or worse, cant pay it back. how is it not hypocritical to say to the individual 'you gotta pay back your loans or lose your home or be sent to prison' but say to the bondholders 'well tough we arent paying our loans back'

now im not saying dont burn them but i am saying its not as simple as they gambled and lost

Monty Burnz

squod wrote: »

Does it mention who it is? I'd imagine a large portion of those people are speculators, gamblers and developers. Does it suggest sorting through those debts to find the ones we should pay or part pay? Credit Unions, pension schemes etc......

It would be illegal to discriminate between them - they all get repaid in proportion.

squod wrote: »

For the past three years there's been no clarity given by any of the political parties in all of this.

I've seen a list of bondholders published somewhere, I'll see if I can find it. Not sure what type of bonds they are though.

Ah, found it - it's a list of Anglo Bondholders. These guys should all have been toasted. The 'speculators' are nearly all savings banks, pension funds and so forth.
http://www.irishcentral.com/news/List-of-bondholders-in-Anglo-Irish-Bank-leaked-110903209.html

thebigbiffo

it's an interesting enough point to make - but i'm still of the opinion that the bondholders sort out their own mess, not us.

fair enough - banks that you and i get paid into, have out mortages and savings with etc should be capitalised to keep the country running but the likes of Anglo...pffft, tough titty if that's where your pension fund decided to invest.

Phill Ewinn

squod wrote: »

Does it mention who it is? I'd imagine a large portion of those people are speculators, gamblers and developers. Does it suggest sorting through those debts to find the ones we should pay or part pay? Credit Unions, pension schemes etc.....

For the past three years there's been no clarity given by any of the political parties in all of this.

Politicians willing to tell the voters the truth? That'll never happen!

Irish Slaves for Europe

Monty Burnz wrote: »

In reality, most of these bonds would be held by pension companies to provide an income to old folk who didn't want to be a burden on the state. Funny how people accept the cartoon version SF peddle with the evil speculators laughing at us inside their golden houses.

Thats complete rubbish, pension funds do not invest all their eggs in one basket, there are regulations preventing them from doing this. Any loses from Irish bonds would not have a big impact on someones pension. And as mentioned several times already, it is complete speculation as to who the bondholders are exactly.

squod

Irish Slaves for Europe wrote: »

. And as mentioned several times already, it is complete speculation as to who the bondholders are exactly.

That's very true. We're asked to have faith in the government who made these decisions to bail their mates out. A party with a long history of corruption and crony-ism. FG in lending their support are no better IMO.

Nevermind_

I'd wonder how many of these bondholders classed as "irish resident" are just irish domiciled companies / SPV's based in the IFSC with ultimately foreign ownership?
many of them may look irish owned but ultimately theyre not.

Monty Burnz

Irish Slaves for Europe wrote: »

Thats complete rubbish, pension funds do not invest all their eggs in one basket, there are regulations preventing them from doing this.

I'm sorry, but what you are saying is complete rubbish. Can you please quote where I said that pension funds invest all their eggs in one basket?

Monty Burnz

Nevermind_ wrote: »

I'd wonder how many of these bondholders classed as "irish resident" are just irish domiciled companies / SPV's based in the IFSC with ultimately foreign ownership?
many of them may look irish owned but ultimately theyre not.

I would suspect most of them, unless this was already allowed for when gathering the information.

Marcusm

Rawhead wrote: »

I don't care if we burn Dermot Desmond or Roman Abromavich, they are both obscenely, disgustingly, astronomically wealthy individuals.

I'm no socialist but let these swines burn and burn badly.

It would be surprising if the bonds were not held by insurance companies, pension funds, credit unions etc. Would be surprised for vanilla senior bank debt to be held y others - more likely to have bought sub debt for yield. In fact, I think Abramovich's fund was suing re Anglo sub debt.

Losses of insurance companies, pension funds etc will be borne by ordinary decent folk.

That being said, I fully expect a restructuring if sovereign as well as bank debt in due course, either because the current EU approach works and the contagion is contained or because it cntinues spreading!

Same result

Nevermind_

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I would suspect most of them, unless this was already allowed for when gathering the information.

i'd doubt this was allowed for, could you imagine the workload of trying to identify the real owner of bonds working through a convoluted myriad of shelf companies and holding companies based in other countries.

if someone wants to hide their ownership of bonds it can be done pretty easily

Phill Ewinn

Could as easily be bonds intended for foreign schemes. Either way we can't afford to pay for all of these bond holders, banking debts and sovereign budget deficits

Irish Slaves for Europe

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I'm sorry, but what you are saying is complete rubbish. Can you please quote where I said that pension funds invest all their eggs in one basket?

You said:

Monty Burnz wrote: »

In reality, most of these bonds would be held by pension companies to provide an income to old folk who didn't want to be a burden on the state. Funny how people accept the cartoon version SF peddle with the evil speculators laughing at us inside their golden houses.

You're peddling a soppy tale about how "old folk" who didn't want to be a burden on the state (I'm still laughing at that by the way), are going to be burned because their pension fund invested in bonds which are now worthless. I'm saying the value of these bonds will only have made up a small portion of the total pension funds portfolio, therefore losses to peoples pension will be minimal. What part of that is difficult exactly?

martinn123

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Ah, found it - it's a list of Anglo Bondholders. These guys should all have been toasted. The 'speculators' are nearly all savings banks, pension funds and so forth.
http://www.irishcentral.com/news/List-of-bondholders-in-Anglo-Irish-Bank-leaked-110903209.html

I think you may find that these are also the pension funds etc. who have been lending our Govt. funds to pay for everyday services.

While we are now borrowing from Europe, the BOND, they issued recently to fund our loans was oversubscribed 4 times, and by who, chect the list above.
Where do you think that money comes from.
Biting off nose to spite face.

extra-ordinary_

martinn123 wrote: »

..We need all the internal investors to help in the restoration of the Construction Industry, Metro North for Example to get our people off the Dole...

Yeh, let's restore our construction industry to where it was - on an unsustainable path fuelling a bubble wihich has us in this mess :rolleyes:

martinn123

extra-ordinary_ wrote: »

Yeh, let's restore our construction industry to where it was - on an unsustainable path fuelling a bubble wihich has us in this mess :rolleyes:

Or building Metro North, Hospitals, Schools, Roads, Factories, and perhaps taking a hundred thousand or so off the Dole.

Not all construction is fuelling a bubble.I am not recommending a return to unsustainable house building.

Marcusm

Sanjuro wrote: »

According to Constantin Gurdiev last night, the bonds may just be resident here, but the bondholders may still be foreign nationals. Until there is a list of who the bondholders actually are, it's still all speculation.

Regardless of where you're from, you gambled, you pay the price. Irish or otherwise.

With all due respect to the guy, he's an academic not a financial markets professional and he does not demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of bond Market dynamics. All this debt is in "dematerialised" form meaning that it's a computer entry at one f two clearing systems - Euroclear or Clearstream. The bonds are held by a member of the clearing system either on their own account or on behalf of clients. If the bonds are registered to an Irish custodian it is a lost certain on behalf of anunderlyin Irish client as non national investors would not use an Irish bank as a custodian/sub custodian. Even IfSC registered funds with a nominal Irish custodian would more likely have a more internationally focused house as actual custodian (JPM, State Street, Deutsche, BoNY or HSBC).

I saw the sales data Irish FIG bonds for quite a period andi recall that they were substantially placed with UK/Ireland "real money accounts" meaning long term holders like pension funds. There is very little trading in such bonds and they will likely still be there. Not so much the green jersey agenda as easier to analyse the bank you see every day.

Seaneh

Monty Burnz wrote: »

Ironic post of the day. The banks are already insolvent, we are all just pretending they are not. Without government/ECB support, they will fold like a house of cards.

And by the way, deposits are a debt on the banks books. But you know that because you clearly know what you are talking about :rolleyes:

They are listed as a debt, but they are entirely separate from the debt banks owe other banks.
Deposits are not treated the same as other debts, depositors are protected before every other debtor on the banks books, so if a bank goes balls up, depositors get they money back first and foremost and then the rest of the banks reserves and assist go to their other various debtors.

But of course, you either knew this and were being a pedant for the sake of being a pedant or you were, in fact, the one making the most ironic post of the day.

thewing

Hang on a minute

Bondholder in ireland buys some bonds which are seen as low-risk investment(at the time)
The said bond runs in to trouble and can't be repaid

But I, along with the rest of the taxpayer, have to foot the bill?

Burn baby burn, disco inferno....

Seaneh

thewing wrote: »

Hang on a minute

Bondholder in ireland buys some bonds which are seen as low-risk investment(at the time)
The said bond runs in to trouble and can't be repaid

But I, along with the rest of the taxpayer, have to foot the bill?

Burn baby burn, disco inferno....

Exactly, it's a low risk, low yield bond.
Not a no risk, guaranteed yield bond!

martinn123

Marcusm wrote: »

With all due respect to the guy, he's an academic not a financial markets professional and he does not demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of bond Market dynamics. All this debt is in "dematerialised" form meaning that it's a computer entry at one f two clearing systems - Euroclear or Clearstream. The bonds are held by a member of the clearing system either on their own account or on behalf of clients. If the bonds are registered to an Irish custodian it is a lost certain on behalf of anunderlyin Irish client as non national investors would not use an Irish bank as a custodian/sub custodian. Even IfSC registered funds with a nominal Irish custodian would more likely have a more internationally focused house as actual custodian (JPM, State Street, Deutsche, BoNY or HSBC).

I saw the sales data Irish FIG bonds for quite a period andi recall that they were substantially placed with UK/Ireland "real money accounts" meaning long term holders like pension funds. There is very little trading in such bonds and they will likely still be there. Not so much the green jersey agenda as easier to analyse the bank you see every day.

Jaysus, no wonder no one really understands what is going on:rolleyes:

squod

Marcusm wrote: »

I saw the sales data Irish FIG bonds for quite a period andi recall that they were substantially placed with UK/Ireland "real money accounts" meaning long term holders like pension funds.

We've been giving tax breaks to pension schemes for bluddy years now. Doesn't mean the holders of these pension accounts are Irish citizens, nor does it make it morally justifiable that everyone (including low income earners) should be asked to bail-out the tax avoidance schemes for high-fliers.

Monty Burnz

Irish Slaves for Europe wrote: »

You're peddling a soppy tale about how "old folk" who didn't want to be a burden on the state (I'm still laughing at that by the way), are going to be burned because their pension fund invested in bonds which are now worthless.

No, I'm trying to paint a more accurate picture of actually owns the bonds. The 'evil speculator' cartoon version seems to have gained currency due to Shinners (who, ironically, know nothing of economics) repeating it. The pensioners should be ok, as their investments should be diversified and/or insured - but these pension funds are the biggest buyers of bonds and equities in the market.

Irish Slaves for Europe wrote: »

I'm saying the value of these bonds will only have made up a small portion of the total pension funds portfolio, therefore losses to peoples pension will be minimal. What part of that is difficult exactly?

That's entirely true. So you have come around to the view that 'evil speculators' aren't the owners of most of these bonds then?

mickydoomsux

Monty Burnz wrote: »

... Shinners (who, ironically, know nothing of economics) .....

They know plenty about banking. Them and their buddies pulled off one of the largest bank robberies on the island on the 20th of December 2004.

Monty Burnz

Seaneh wrote: »

Deposits are not treated the same as other debts, depositors are protected before every other debtor on the banks books, so if a bank goes balls up, depositors get they money back first and foremost and then the rest of the banks reserves and assist go to their other various debtors.

That's not the position - depositors don't get preferential treatment over other creditors.

Seaneh wrote: »

But of course, you either knew this and were being a pedant for the sake of being a pedant or you were, in fact, the one making the most ironic post of the day.

It seems you are making another bid for it yourself. Congratulations, a one-two.

Hack12

The main thing we need to do in this country is to show people they will be held to account. Bond holders get burnt thats life as look how many people are in negative equity (i.e the are burnt). Do we write down there mortgages? I personaly would prefer to do that on a moral ground as most of the people who are in negative equity are paying for the bondholders with higher taxes, interest rates etc. We need to get real and let the market decide and the market decided they should get burnt and the government decided they shouldn't.

Irish Slaves for Europe

Monty Burnz wrote: »

No, I'm trying to paint a more accurate picture of actually owns the bonds.

No your using emotive language to argue a viewpoint thats not based on any evidence. You don't know who owns the bonds so why are you acting like you do.

Monty Burnz wrote: »

The 'evil speculator' cartoon version seems to have gained currency due to Shinners (who, ironically, know nothing of economics) repeating it. The pensioners should be ok, as their investments should be diversified and/or insured - but these pension funds are the biggest buyers of bonds and equities in the market.

The vast majority of people don't think they are evil, we just don't want their losses which have been forced on us by FF. Now if the leaked list of Anglo Bondholders is accurate, of that list of 80 companies, David Malone researched the companies and found the following:

Of the 80 listed companies only 7 listed their business as dealing with pensions and being a cooperative savings institution. Of those, only 4 listed churches and unions as their clients, the others could well have been big pension funds. The churches and unions in question were in Germany not Ireland. Those seven companies are amongst the smallest of Anglo Irish's bond holders. I only have figures for four of the seven. The largest, Union Investments of Germany, has a mere €165 billion in assets under management.


The total assets under management which I was able to compile from publicly available figures is €20,871,150,000,000. That is an underestimate because the bond holders who turn out to be Private and Swiss banks don't publish any figures. So Anglo Irish's 'bond holders' hold and invest MORE than 20.8 trillion euros. Guido lists those bond holders as holding between them 4 Billion euros in Anglo Irish bonds.


Now, in my opinion both figures are likely to be wrong. Certainly my figure is a large underestimate. But taking them at face value Anglo Irish would account for an one 5000th of the total assets being managed by all the bond holders. So would even a total default by Anglo Irish cause that much, let alone systemic, pain and risk? Why are the 'Bond holders' and the Irish government so concerned that the Irish people be forced to take the loss and pay the debts for them?


Now lets look at the other side of the equation, at Ireland itself. Well Ireland's GDP before the crash, in 2008, was ... drum roll please... €207 billion. Or 0.207 trillion.


SO.... on one side we have Ireland whose bond holders, its people, have between them a total GDP wealth of 0.207 trillion euros. Who are being FORCED, against their will, to pay Anglo Irish bank's debts to its bond holders, who between them hold 20.8 Trillion euros. The people of Ireland are paying to, and protecting the wealth and power of, people who have 100 times more wealth!

The bond holders of Anglo Irish are a very good guide to the identity of the bond holders of ALL OUR BANKS. The bond holders being protected, in every nation, on the advice of the banks and financial class, are THE BANKS AND THE WEALTHIEST OF THE FINANCIAL CLASS.

http://golemxiv-credo.blogspot.com/2010/10/who-are-bond-holders-we-are-bailing-out.html

Monty Burnz

There seems to be some confusion here - I'm not saying that bondholders should be protected (c.f. my comment on Anglo bondholders). I'm just disputing the notion that Roman Abramovic, Dermot Desmond and their ilk hold them all.