NAMA, Wallace & the Robinsons


What does that mean?

So are you saying that Cerberus bought a specific loan in order to try to shut up one of our TDs from asking questions? Is that what ‘sorting out’ is? That’s somehow good, is it?? :unamused:

What the fuck? Are you saying that it doesn’t matter how much NAMA now sells the loans for? I think you’ll find yourself in a minority position with that argument.

Fine Gaelers are fucking pathetic.


No, they acquired it as part of a portfolio of loans from UB. Read the links!

They sure are.

Of course it matter what NAMA sell loans for – I would have loved it if they had sold them for par value for example. But it sounds like they were sold to the highest bidder.
I dislike NAMA’s warehousing of loans intensely, and IMHO the sooner they get rid of everything to the private sector, the better.

BTW, do you know why Gerry Adams and Mick Wallace are trying to stop NAMA from selling loans to the highest bidder at the moment? Seems wrong to me.


Grouping together thousands of properties into one single**** €6.25 BILLION**** portfolio is what’s wrong! Split it up into numerous smaller portfolios so that there would be more bidders (including domestic bidders) would result in a higher price and a better return for the taxpayer. Many of the assets could also be used immediately to help address the housing crisis but instead they are being gifted to a foreign vulture fund for 12.5c in the Euro! EVERY TD should be objecting to this not just Gerry Adams and Mick Wallace. The ignorance and stupidity of people astounds me.


I agree that selling as a portfolio seems like it might not be the best way to get value – but on the other hand it does mean that you get rid of the pure shit that might otherwise the unsaleable on its own (almost all of the loans are nonperforming). I believe that it’s standard to bundle up distressed loans this way.

Anyway, my question was not how best to bundle the loans, but why are Adams and Wallace trying to stop them being sold to the high bidder in particular?


Hi Coles, 2 quick questions.

Out of interest how would it help address the housing crisis?

Why are the non-Irish Bank’s selling their non-performing loans in large portfolios if it’s common sense that splitting it into smaller packages would generate a higher return?


What? Gerry Adams has asked for the sale to be suspended pending an investigation into the Project Eagle deal. Why do you post that rubbish?

But this shouldn’t be anything to do with Gerry Adams. This should be of concern to ALL TDs! Just because Gerry Adams is calling for the sale to be suspended shouldn’t mean that Fine Gaelers call for the exact opposite. That’s moronic stuff.


No link, unfortunately. I don’t have an online subscription to the SBP. But Ulster Bank does ring a bell now that you’ve mentioned it.


But his position makes no sense. The portfolio should surely be sold to the highest bidder, regardless of who they are or whether they’re nice guys. Even if the Eagle stuff was dodgy (and I obviously don’t know if it was) that doesn’t mean the taxpayer should loose out on the sale of another portfolio. Investigate Eagle and jail anyone who did something illegal, but don’t fuck this one up too.

TDs should not be trying to influence the sale of NAMA assets to score political points.

Adams and Wallace are trying to interfere with the sale to the highest bidder. As a taxpayer, this is not OK.


It would remove the financial profit motive from the decision process. The properties that best suit development as social housing could be completed irrespective of whether or not they achieved a financial profit. The ‘social profit’ would form part of the equation. Can you understand that concept?

They want out of Ireland and NAMA is setting the market. They’ve sold pretty much everything to Cerberus anyway. Cerberus will now have a massive control on the future development of the country.


What? They have a duty to make sure that the best outcome is achieved! They wouldn’t be doing their jobs if they just ignored the problem.


Social profit? No, it’s an quantifiable term used to disguise giving something to someone and making someone else pay for it.

According to NAMA’s press release, the majority of the residential assets were already occupied/rented.
Land only represented 24% of the portfolio and 67% of the portfolio was outside Dublin in areas with limited demand for housing.
There is a huge amount of empty houses & sites outside Dublin already where social housing candidates don’t want to go. Adding more land/units to that list isn’t going to solve anything.
Making the existing Dublin residential properties in the portfolio available for social housing would result in those occupying the units being evicted i.e. not solving any problem. I also wonder if these assets are the ones DCC rejected when Nama offered them to them?
Are Cerberus going to put these assets in a vault and lock them away? Unlikely, they’ll have to monetize them so the end result is they’ll get used if they’re appropriate.

It’s not just in Ireland that foreign Bank’s make large NPL portfolio sales
There was €125bn sold in the UK & Ireland in 2014 (mainly UK)
€26bn in Germany
€43bn in Spain,
€16bn in Italy


Also, saying “NAMA loans should be used for social housing” is completely wrong.

Let’s say the open market value of the loan is €1m. Does the government want to spend an extra €1m on social housing? If yes, what are the chances that that particular NAMA loan will give the best bang for the buck as social housing? Pretty small. The houses might be in the wrong part of the country; or the wrong type of property; or too expensive; or too cheap; or not near the right services; etc. If the government wants to spend €1m on social housing, they should do that in the most efficient way possible, which is almost certainly not going to be Celtic Tiger NAMA property. Sell the loans for €1m, use the money to build social housing.

(And for the record I think the government should spend a metric shitload on social housing, while phasing out rent supplement/allowance/etc for private rented accommodation).


As a society we can quantify it is lots of ways, but most importantly it’s worth keeping in mind that the taxpayers are not a disinterested party. Unlike Cerberus, we have to pay for social housing one way or another whether that’s in rent allowance, council housing, or whatever. By disposing of these assets we are going to incur costs that haven’t been factored into the sale price. To be honest, I didn’t expect you to understand it.

Land 24% by value? That’s an awful lot of land! Given that the major price component in our over inflated property market is LAND, then there was a very good argument for selling it off in smaller amounts to encourage it’s use rather than the continued hoarding of it.

That land exists either way. It shouldn’t be used as a deciding factor in deciding what to do with the land in Dublin and in the Greater Dublin Area. Argumentum ad absurdum.

A red herring. Nobody is proposing that.

Cerberus have bought almost everything that has come on the market. I would assume they will manage their assets in the best way to maximise their profit. If that means warehousing some assets in order to force up rents and to inflate the value of their development land then that’s what they will do. They have no ‘social obligation’.


There is no proposal whatsoever to do that. Fine Gael and Labour want the the private sector to deal with it. It’s not going to happen and it is inevitable that it will end in disaster.


I’ve been proposing it for ages. Vote for me.


Not a chance. You’re not ‘progressive’.


Namawinelake reporting on Twitter yesterday that the High Court action that Cerberus has initiated against Wallace is the only case they have initiated against any borrower, corporate or individual, despite the massive number of Irish debtors now in their portfolio. So it looks like Wallace is getting singled out for special attention one way or another.


The goons here will clap like seals and sneer at that fact. Wait for it.


This is a classic debating tactic - before anyone can respond, tar anyone who questions your side as imbeciles. Adds nothing to the debate and is probably more suited to


As opposed to this?

You’ve added nothing to this discussion except the above contribution so I think we’ll just park your criticism there.