Ratings Agencies make FF Pay for their failure to be upfront

Barname · 25-08-2010 06:16AM #1

So now the Irish taxpayer will be punished further by having to pay higher % rates on the cash that FF will borrow to support the 'systemically important' Anglo Irish Bank (We wont even discuss FFingers and INBS)

Instead of resetting to zero and taking the required hits in 2006/07 Its now clear that FF (with the approval of the Dail) have allowed economic and fiscal matters to drag

3 years of slow painful dripping leaks of fact and truth, I can remember reading in 2008 and a guy was claiming Anglo was going to create a 30 - 40 Billion hole for the Irish Taxpayer and people scoffed at him, I guess he was correct yet one wonders did the Govt have access to the same data that he had?

Markets punish the kind of truth bending and spoofery that members of the Dail are so fond of.

Perhaps its time for change? Why should we be held as debt slaves for our failed political 'elite' ?

Mister men · 25-08-2010 07:40AM

We deserve what we get. Cowards the lot of us.

Poly · 25-08-2010 07:50AM

We, the taxpayer and our children will pay for FF's failure.

dan_d · 25-08-2010 07:53AM

We should probably stop scoffing at people who predict things we don't want to hear.

They're turning out to have an uncanny knack of being correct.

jank · 25-08-2010 08:29AM

This is bad, very bad for Ireland. The "turning a corner" malarky is washing thin now and the general public are already on edge. Where is it going to end. How many more Billions have to go to Anglo and the banks? There is no easy options though anymore.

I just cannot see them (FF + Greens) get through another budget. I hope they do as it will be the deathknell of FF for 15 years, but I just cannot see them get the votes for it.

Barname · 25-08-2010 09:11AM

jank wrote: »

This is bad, very bad for Ireland. The "turning a corner" malarky is washing thin now and the general public are already on edge. Where is it going to end. How many more Billions have to go to Anglo and the banks?

Anglo Irish €30 Billion +
INBS €7 Billion (that will be the final number)
AIB €30 Billion (this is the elephant in the corner)

so, there you have it, thats close on €70 Billion, gone, zappo.

The Markets know it, the Rating Agencies know it.

For how much longer will our failed political 'elite' attempt to pull the wool? Not long, their game is up, the squeeze is on.

Parachutes on.

Laminations · 25-08-2010 09:23AM

It's total c0ck,

We apparently bailed out the banks (especially Anglo) so as to save our sovereign credit rating- still not sure how private bank mismanagement and excessive risk could have reflected badly on sovereign borrowing, in fact I'm sure bond holders invested in the excessively risky Anglo to get excessively large returns- but now our sovereign credit rating is being dragged down by the bailout that was intended to protect it.

hobochris · 25-08-2010 09:26AM

Laminations wrote: »

It's total c0ck,

We apparently bailed out the banks (especially Anglo) so as to save our sovereign credit rating- still not sure how private bank mismanagement and excessive risk could have reflected badly on sovereign borrowing, in fact I'm sure bond holders invested in the excessively risky Anglo to get excessively large returns- but now our sovereign credit rating is being dragged down by the bailout that was intended to protect it.

The stench from Anglo is only getting stronger.

I wonder when we will find out the full story behind why FF are so intent on not letting this bank go to the wall like it should.

hinault · 25-08-2010 09:44AM

hobochris wrote: »

The stench from Anglo is only getting stronger.

I wonder when we will find out the full story behind why FF are so intent on not letting this bank go to the wall like it should.

Allegedly, INBS is where all the all the dodgy political loans reside.
That's what I am hearing.

Anglo is where all the dodgy developer loans were generated from.

One does get the distinct feeling that FF are literally jumping through hoops for reasons other than just saving two commerical lenders.
Their fixation would justifies the general publics suspicions.

Barname · 25-08-2010 09:52AM

Staff are very hard at work in Anglo and INBS

Can the peasants back-off and leave us to do our work ?

mitresize5 · 25-08-2010 09:55AM

they will still get 30% of the vote at the next election.

My take on it is that there isn't a huge conspiracy behind keeping Anglo & NIB afloat its just that to row back on it now would be to admit they were wrong to prop them up in the first place.

Admitting you were wrong is fundamentally against first principles for FF

George Orwell 1982 · 25-08-2010 10:03AM

There is a double blow in this in that now only have we been downgraded but their outlook for the rating (not the economy) is negative.

S&P cite the rising cost of the banking bailout as in their statement and project a debt-GDP ratio of 113% in 2012. They project the total cost of the bank bailout and Nama to be €90 billion.

Irish ten year bond yields have risen above 5.5 percent this morning and the spread against their German equivalent, at about 340 basis points, is the highest it has been in recent years.

Very hard to see how we can come back from this and avoid a spiral of rising debt costs and pessimistic investor sentiment.

amacca · 25-08-2010 10:23AM

Laminations wrote: »

It's total c0ck,

We apparently bailed out the banks (especially Anglo) so as to save our sovereign credit rating- still not sure how private bank mismanagement and excessive risk could have reflected badly on sovereign borrowing, in fact I'm sure bond holders invested in the excessively risky Anglo to get excessively large returns- but now our sovereign credit rating is being dragged down by the bailout that was intended to protect it.

Now that the dust is beginning to settle it certainly seems that way....

just goes to show what a fickle master the market is. When guarantee was introduced how could a bondholder not fail to be delighted that his higher risk investment was completely guaranteed?

Now at the point where many have gotten out (at least so it would seem but open to correction on this as it could be partly down to my paranoia) this guarantee becomes a bad thing.

just goes to show that the hard but sensible decisions should have been taken in the first place as whats happened is like trying to prop up a collapsing building with a sausage (please somebody tell me my analogy is crap and by all means come up with a better one)

Anglo and INBS were never systemic imo.....know its easy to say in hindsight but they should have been let go to the wall and all our resources poured into AIB and BOI

wouldn't discount mitresize5's opinion that a lot of this is political hubris.....it could simply be that to row back now would be against policy and admitting they were wrong but I would add that theyre probably reluctant to go back now as it wouldnt really save much because the cash has effectively been squandered and it aint ever coming back so they might as well proceed with their failure of a decision.

markiemark2005 · 25-08-2010 10:34AM

I thought we have turned the corner?

amacca · 25-08-2010 10:36AM

markiemark2005 wrote: »

I thought we have turned the corner?

You my friend are a funny man! I shall keep an eye on you.:)

Cookie_Monster · 25-08-2010 10:48AM

George Orwell 1982 wrote: »

Irish ten year bond yields have risen above 5.5 percent this morning and the spread against their German equivalent, at about 340 basis points, is the highest it has been in recent years.

Very hard to see how we can come back from this and avoid a spiral of rising debt costs and pessimistic investor sentiment.

Very true, especially so when you consider how frequently and how much debt bonds are issued at this current rate, never mind the ones coming later this year and next which will no doubt attract an even higher one

hobochris wrote: »

I wonder when we will find out the full story behind why FF are so intent on not letting this bank go to the wall like it should.

hinault wrote: »

A
One does get the distinct feeling that FF are literally jumping through hoops for reasons other than just saving two commerical lenders.
Their fixation would justifies the general publics suspicions.

+1 to both of those, it is so dodgy looking to the average man on the street.

markiemark2005 wrote: »

I thought we have turned the corner?

we have, 4 times, so we are back where we started now

liammur · 25-08-2010 10:55AM

No need to panic folks, another hero has found the solution to our problems!

http://www.rte.ie/aertel/131-01.html

irishh_bob · 25-08-2010 10:55AM

mitresize5 wrote: »

they will still get 30% of the vote at the next election.

My take on it is that there isn't a huge conspiracy behind keeping Anglo & NIB afloat its just that to row back on it now would be to admit they were wrong to prop them up in the first place.

Admitting you were wrong is fundamentally against first principles for FF

you could well be right

Cookie_Monster · 25-08-2010 11:12AM

liammur wrote: »

No need to panic folks, another hero has found the solution to our problems!

http://www.rte.ie/aertel/131-01.html

oh, I see S&P analysis was flawed and they clearly don't know what they are at.
:rolleyes: idiots

Given the current situation I think maybe, just maybe, the NTMA dealings may be flawed...

Permabear · 25-08-2010 11:14AM

This post has been deleted.

liammur · 25-08-2010 11:15AM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

oh, I see S&P analysis was flawed and they clearly don't know what they are at.
:rolleyes: idiots

Given the current situation I think maybe, just maybe, the NTMA dealings may be flawed...

You can choose for yourself who is right, it boils down to:

S&P is taking its decision because it believes the cost of the banking bailouts could reach as much as €50bn. The agency also raised concerns over the ultimate cost of Anglo Irish and NAMA.
In a statement, S&P said: "We understand that NAMA has been organised in such a way as to keep it off the Irish Government's balance sheet. We take a different approach."
It said NAMA represented a "direct obligation" to the Government. The NTMA said in a statement last night: "We believe this approach is flawed."

Barname · 25-08-2010 11:17AM

So,

Independence was it worth it? Blood spilled and lives lost and all for what?

So some greedy FF'ers could line their pockets?

Our Sovereign fiscal independence is gone meanwhile the political 'elite' take tax payer funded jets from Dublin to Derry

The beaten down Irish peasant serves his 'betters' well, very well.

Remember, at the next election..

Vote FF, help them steal more.

danbohan · 25-08-2010 11:32AM

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

ok donegalfella , we all know they wont do what needs to be done , so how do you see it pan out from here ?

whatawaster · 25-08-2010 11:33AM

donegalfella wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

There is not one mainstream political party who are even planning cuts to public sector wages or social welfare, so you're right not to hold your breath

Welease · 25-08-2010 11:36AM

whatawaster wrote: »

There is not one mainstream political party who are even planning cuts to public sector wages or social welfare, so you're right not to hold your breath

If your primary concern was your own political career, would you risk alienating 400,000+ voters?

Barname · 25-08-2010 11:40AM

Welease wrote: »

If your primary concern was your own political career, would you risk alienating 400,000+ voters?

Are you attempting to justify Economic Treachery ?

danbohan · 25-08-2010 11:44AM

Barname wrote: »

Are you attempting to justify Economic Treachery ?

you dont have to justify it , its govt policy !

Welease · 25-08-2010 11:45AM

Barname wrote: »

Are you attempting to justify Economic Treachery ?

No, I'm explaining why they don't make savage cuts to many specific areas..

Cookie_Monster · 25-08-2010 11:51AM

liammur wrote: »

You can choose for yourself who is right, it boils down to:

S&P is taking its decision because it believes the cost of the banking bailouts could reach as much as €50bn. The agency also raised concerns over the ultimate cost of Anglo Irish and NAMA.
In a statement, S&P said: "We understand that NAMA has been organised in such a way as to keep it off the Irish Government's balance sheet. We take a different approach."
It said NAMA represented a "direct obligation" to the Government. The NTMA said in a statement last night: "We believe this approach is flawed."

I totally agree with S&P. No one in their right mind would should touch Irish debt at the moment. There is just too much hidden information in NAMA to know if you'll ever see your money again.

The bolded point has already been proven by the EU and we were told to change the way it's recorded to show it properly. Says it all as far as I'm concerned.

Barname · 25-08-2010 11:53AM

Welease wrote: »

No, I'm explaining why they don't make savage cuts to many specific areas..

no explanation is valid, unless your name is Brian Cowen, Mary Coughlan or such there is no need to fight their battles

the wheels are off, this economy has been seizing for almost 4 years, 4 years wasted in which Cowen failed to act in the interest of all so as to protect the interest of FF's golden circle

A man, a patriot would have stood aside long before now, not Mr Cowen and his parochial gombeen occupation of The Taoiseachs Office

Its endgame now, pretty soon those on Tracker Mortgages will be told they are being cancelled and that they will have to pay a market rate

then the fun will begin, then the peasants might mobilise

Scarab80 · 25-08-2010 11:54AM

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

The bolded point has already been proven by the EU and we were told to change the way it's recorded to show it properly. Says it all as far as I'm concerned.

No we weren't. You are thinking of the promissory note system of bank recapitalisations in relation to Anglo and INBS.

Ratings Agencies make FF Pay for their failure to be upfront

Comments