Cost of Anglo Bailout.

Brian Lucey on radio at 1 was saying that during his interview on Newstalk that Alan Dukes flagged the upcoming 10Bn recap may not be the last.

Anyone want to guess where it will all end?

Gosh, 12.763 m of string!!!

This piece of twine could not be enough to hang up all those people who are i.e.!Talking Down the Economy!! B Ahern!! Business Solutions. Its great to see the E.U. Getting into the nitty gritty of the Competition skewing of the system in favour of the corroupt. Strokes and Folks and the Pension Funds to Bailout the BANKS. Rewarding the gangsters and punishing the prudent ethical people. Making the Stupid Subservient Taxpayer pay for all the damage caused by the Sleeping Regulators and Property Speculator Tycoons.

Maryocarroll…remember the 700 years of British Oppression…we have`nt exhausted all avenues yet !


Anyhow. dukes started by saying that closing anglo would cost 70b - the panel more or less laughed at him on that.
It cannot cost more than 20-30b. And we are close to pouring that in now and over the future. Anyone who voted to keep it alive is as Eamonn Gilmore says an economic traitor

But does that include the depositors BOE? I’m my own view (feel free to use it) the reason Anglo were offering 5.5% interest was not that they needed money to lend more or repair their balance sheet. They were well past that stage. The reason they offered 5.5% was for the same reason AIB decided to pay a dividend to their shareholders. Sheehy Came on the Telly to tell us it was all fine. They paid 5.5 because there was not a penny left in the vaults. Not 4% tier 1 capital, not even 1%. The assets were dropping so fast that if there was any slight call on the banks we would have had the run in minutes. The 5.5% was really to say, “we don’t care if you invest with us, we’ll give the EU the two fingers as we use state aid to prop up a bank and use said aid to offer silly rates.” Then at the same time they distracted from the question raised here and by Floppy and George. Is there a penny in the bank? Answer, there wasn’t then and there still isn’t now. - Till the recap goes in. That’s why it would cost a lot more than 20Bn.

But thats just my 2 x 10^9 cent.

Maybe Dukes and Lenihan know more about the true situation than the panel do.

Most of the information around the banking collapse has been deliberately misleading but certain statement made by the principles have been true but not necessarily correct based on what the hearers knew and understood at the time.

Anglo was definitely systemic. If had gone under then AIB and BOI would have followed them. Not due to loss of confidence. Which is what the hearers thought might be the reason. But because of massive systemic fraud by all the banks which the principals knew about when they made these statements. One goes, they all go.

A resolution trust wind-down of Anglo would not cost 70B. But only if their public a/c’s were a true and accurate statement of their financial position and they and their peers had engaged in normal banking practices. We already know that Anglos a/c’s were fraudulent for years and it now looks like AIBs public a/c’s were equally fraudulent. And maybe BOI too.

So maybe Dukes and Lenihan are telling the truth about the cost of shutting down Anglo. Because they know what the panel does not know. They know the full details about the fraud at Anglo and how deeply intertwined it is with the other banks. Shut down Anglo and suddenly AIB collapses just like Anglo did and the full cost is a minimum of 70B.

I shudder to think what the AIB accounts would look like even if they had only the very qualified level of financial transparency that today’s Anglo a/c’s have.

The 2.x Bn that Anglo lent Quinn is ranked behind bonds and other bank loans.
They will try to get as much of it back as possible.
According to Alan Dukes on The Last Word just now…