inquiry into 'insider' NAMA deal


Stolen :nin


Gee, do you think that’s why it’s in quotes?


?? who stole what ??

+1 Supermonkey’s openness advocacy. Temperamentally I’m all for openness (open source, et cetera, ad absurdum would be my starting point), and this really highlights the whole problem with security/whatever through obscurity. If you’re going to be secret with the aim of performing well, you’d better be very good at secrecy. If NAMA didn’t try to achieve results through secrecy, but through a more open market approach, then there would be no need to fear “leaks”, and little need for heavy (and in this case ineffective) security protocols. Punters/journalists/Pinsters/market-participants would quite happily review deals via LinkedIn, company-records, etc., to see if they could sniff out some impropriety.

HOWEVER, if what you want is to create a heavy velvet curtain, behind which you can do unspeakable things and all sorts of hanky panky while it muffles your giggles, obscures your bumps, and mops up your… :angry: … maybe NAMA’s been pretty fit for purpose up to now.


Too many people busting into the tent perhaps. Ya know NAMA is the new tent right? You all knew that… surely :frowning:



Major hat tip there WGU excellent :stuck_out_tongue:


Indeed. Or here. The Pin is the new Wikileaks :smiley:


+1 v. nice
And of course, we know that in the sequel they’ll be saved in the end by the comming of a namassiah


+2 Thanks WGU I knew you wouldn’t fail!

All the graphic needs is a snake in the tree with an apt head on it - maybe Peter Bacon’s or Bertie’s?


It’s more allegorical than that.

If you look for the symbolism, then this is a story of biblical proportions:

You have the creation of a garden of paradise where life is trouble-free as long as you keep to one simple rule - don’t eat the forbidden fruit from the Tree of Knowledge. Yet, that rule is against the inherent human nature - and so is a rule designed to ensure the inhabitants of this Eden fall from grace.

The Creator has left the tree available, but unusable, to the inhabitants. Along comes the Serpent, more cognisant of human frailty, and lures them into eating the fruit. At that moment they become aware of guilt and sin - something alien to them before now.

Once the Creator discovers they have broken the one rule, this being the Old Testament, he gets biblical on them.

Paradise Lost!


Indeed indeed. The cat is out of the bag looking at the list of who has the data. But the guys who are going to financially benefit from this mess have all the info, and they guys who need to pony up (us) are in the dark.





Todays Indo says that Enda was questioned by the constabulary last week, if he were a subversive of a more traditional kind he would have been doing a 48 hour stint under the OSA. Speaking of the OSA **they should haul him and that wife of his in for treason. :frowning: Note section 10 … html#sec10

, or

© which is or contains or includes a seditious document.

(2) In particular and without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing sub-section of this section, it shall not be lawful for any person to send or contribute to any newspaper or other periodical publication or for the proprietor of any newspaper or other periodical publication to publish in such newspaper or publication any letter, article, or communication which is sent or contributed or purports to be sent or contributed by or on behalf of an unlawful organisation or which is of Such nature or character that the printing of it would be a contravention of the foregoing sub-section of this section.

(3) Every person who shall contravene either of the foregoing sub-sections of this section shall be guilty of an offence under this sub-section and shall be liable on summary conviction thereof to a fine not exceeding one hundred pounds, or, at the discretion of the Court, to imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months or to both such fine and such imprisonment and also (in any case), if the Court so directs, to forfeit every copy in his possession of the document, newspaper, or publication in relation to which the offence was committed and also (where the act constituting the offence was the setting up in type or the printing of a document) to forfeit, if the Court so directs, so much of the printing machinery in his possession as is specified in that behalf by the Court,

(4) Every person who unlawfully has in his possession a document which was printed or published in contravention of this section or a newspaper or other periodical publication containing a letter, article, or other communication published therein in contravention of this section shall, when so requested by a member of the Gárda Síochána, deliver up to such member every copy in his possession of such document or of such newspaper or publication (as the case may be), and if he fails or refuses so to do he shall be guilty of an offence under this sub-section and shall be liable on-summary conviction thereof to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months and also, if the Court so directs, to forfeit every copy in his possession of the document, newspaper or publication in relation to which the offence was committed.

(5) Nothing in this section shall render unlawful the setting up in type, printing, publishing, sending through the post, distributing, selling, offering for sale, or having possession of a document or a copy of a document which is published at the request or by permission of the Government or is published in the course or as part of a fair report of the proceedings in either House of the Oireachtas or in a court of justice or before any other court or tribunal lawfully exercising jurisdiction.**


Six months imprisonment. Great.


The rot seems to be spreading … 66334.html


Where are E&Y on this? Presumably NAMA would have a cause of action against them as NAMA’s advisors, for allowing confidential information to be disseminated. Are E&Y still advising NAMA?


Anyone? Are we drastically overestimating the value of the information?


Bottom line. it amounts to insider trading.

NAMA have a property portfolio, for which they paid 32 billion. If we see a 20% discount half of the sales due to insider knowledge, Then this amounts to 3 billion extra losses that the taxpayer has to cover.
3 Billion is roughly 3% extra tax per year for 10 years to All PAYE workers.


Explain in an example how a 20% discount could happen “due to insider knowledge” please.


If the Market Price for 4 bed detached houses in Lucan is €500,000. But a significant percentage of the insiders know that a particular property is a NAMA property and bids above 400K will be accepted, What is the probability that anyone will bid it up to 500K?.
What is the probability that the buyer will flip the property for a 100K profit?
Is having the knowledge and using it to profit legal or ethical?