Closing Anglo would cost €70bn - Cowen … 72096.html

Clowen trying to scare people with BIG numbers, Fahey was at the same lark even though he admitted to now reading any documents.

Trained to perform. Sick Puppies.

If a quick wind down of the bank would cost €70bn, that implies that Anglo itself needs to come up with €70bn from somewhere in order to repair itself…?

Even over a decent period of time, how is such a diseased bank going to do that?

Ok do, do it.

A chap on “Spidey…” something, claimed ijn a thread 180Bn stolen from the country via a complicit Government.

Interesting claim very plausible especially if they did it unwittingly then it is all the more plausible.

If I recall it correctly, don’t Anglo deposits amount to €23b or something?

And if those deposits were to be transferred to other banks, wouldn’t the amount needed to cover those only be a fraction of that? 10% or whatever the fractional reserve dictates?

Ed: Where I’m going with that question is - couldn’t we do that transfer, close the doors and tell everyone else to just fuck off and leave us alone?


that’s what I would like to know too.

Anglo goes wallop.

Government finds €70Bn.

Who exactly does it dish that €70bn out to?

Why can we not be told this?

Maybe we would understand then… :unamused:

Time for another promissory note? Repo’d at the ECB…

edit: hand all the assets over the NAMA to work out…

Has he got a new sooper dooper abacus or has he just been counting Claraman’s unusally large number of toes ? :mrgreen:

This means the real figure for bailing out Anglo is going to €35Bn soon.

The only way they can make continuing with the madness seem sane is by continually pushing out the unquantifiable shutdown cost.

At one stage they were talking about the shutdown cost being €35Bn.

Now the real cost is going there - so the shutdown cost goes further out.

The worst part is the real cost is probably the €70Bn.

I thought the entire loan book was around €70 billion?

Who’s still worried about the loans :smiley:

Thats my belief too.
Which makes it a bizzare statement … as though he doesn’t have a clue what he’s talking about. :angry:

Its the same old shyte spin. See her is the logical construct.

It’s a SETUP! A Classic setup.

The point is we never get to discuss the fact as has been raised that we are not on the hook for the money but it is being sold that we are. Its a Con.

You know like what Con-men get up to, fraud. Simple.

This Bank had what approx 7000 customers? A surprisingly similar number to about the amount you would estimate to be FF & FF Cronies spanning the generations, give or take a few thousand but its not far off, say I use my favorite 80/20 rule, 20% being those on the very edge and 5600 (the 80%) being the centre movers and shakers. 5000 is a number mooted here if I remember correctly as being approx what you need to control this country. Sounds about right to me.

Peel away and as you get to the core you seethe Double Decker stuffed with the 50 fuckers who did most of the damage, the Green-Jersey-Fairplay gang, they did the most damage. The rest where necessary for the pyramid scheme that was Anglo so as to obscure the jokers astride the top in their Double Decker gang bang.

I put as much credibility on anything Clowen says now as I did on Comical Austin’s interest rate “analysis” over the years

Pardon my anger the man is a massive, useless sack of shit. And that’s me being kind

Perhaps other large Irish financial institutions who could not handle such an impairment without requiring further investment from your generous taxpayer…

Which means the money is going to be required anyway!

Dismantle Anglo and then at least we get to see exactly who loses out and we can decide from there who’s worthy of a bailout or not.

NAMA is now well an truly in the equation, that is the plan and what comes after equals sign has been rubbed out on the backboard or so we are told.

Arguably, if it costs €70bn to wind down now, it will cost €70+bn to wind down in the future. Let’s say it’s wound down over 10 years. It costs a lot of money to keep the bank operating, based on it’s 6 month report it cost roughly 200m for 6 months including commission and depreciation etc. So 400m a year for 10 years = 4bn in operating costs.

Their report suggests that they take in more interest than they pay out. However, this must be doubtful. I would imagine that included in that interest “income” is income that is rolled into the principal amount. It is still technically income. But let’s be generous to them and say that interest actually paid in is enough to meet their interest payments out.

But that still leaves the money the government is borrowing to keep them capitalised - 35bn. If Anglo is wound down now we can at least put that to rest and say it is part of the national debt. But keeping the money in Anglo means that we have to pay interest on it for 10 years and only then can we deal with it. So there is 10 more years of interest to be paid just to keep the developer loans from being realised. It’s unlikely to get any better in the next 10 years so we will still have to deal with it then.

Ultimately what he means is not that it will cost us more to close it now - it will probably cost us less - but that we will be forced to pay for it upfront as opposed to letting it gradually slip into the government accounts. Yet our bonds have remained reasonably close to Germanys (given that our state is effectively bankrupt) based on the premise that these recapitalisations were once off expenses. Shutting it now and taking the pain would be in keeping with this and the markets would likely appreciate that. But saying that we are going to have a 70bn exposure over the next 10 years means that we haven’t a hope of getting the deficit back to 3%.

It seems that Cowen put about as much thought into this as he does about liting a cigarette.