Tag Archives: Finance

October 30, 2024 · 14:47

The greed driven protocols

There is a setting that I had forgotten about and I was reminded of this by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4gzp7y8e7vo) in here we see the headline ‘JP Morgan sues customers over viral TikTok cheque fraud’. To help you with this setting I take you back to 1981. I was in the draught army (pun intended) and like any teenager on a short budget I sometimes ran out of budget in week 3. Now when you had a postal account there was a nice trick. You had a postal cheque which could be cashed in for $500, no questions asked. Now this goes against your balance no matter how slim it was, as such you always had access to $500. As such in times in the last week you cashed it in without having a good balance and you started the month with minus something and then the wage came in setting you in the plus. Is you plan it nicely you could spread that minus over two months setting you in the clear. It wasn’t a great way, but when the numbers are aligned against you it was a solution. The interest was really low in those days, so it would set you back less then $2. All this happened in 1981, 43 years ago. So now we get “US banking giant JP Morgan Chase, is suing customers who allegedly took advantage of a glitch by illegally withdrawing thousands of dollars from its ATMs. The “infinite money glitch”, as it became known on TikTok, allowed the bank’s customers to write a large cheque to themselves, deposit it and then withdraw the funds before the cheque bounced.” OK, this had a little setting that people rote cheques to themselves and withdrew it before the option crashed. Then we get “Last month, the Wall Street Journal reported that JP Morgan Chase closed the loophole a few days after several videos telling people about the glitch went viral on social media.” Is it really? I used the $500 option in the Netherlands 43 years ago as such, how did the loophole get created in the first place? As I see it this is all about greed driven protocols, protocols the negate certain timestamps, and now JP Morgan is crying fowl? Yes, another pun intended. And If I can recollect this setting, so can others. Is it fraud? That is the question. You see fraud is states as “wrongful or criminal deception intended to result in financial or personal gain”. The wrongful or criminal deception is key. Were people allowed to write a check to themselves? If that is legally allowed the fraud fails. There is a financial gain, yet if these people claim that they were going to pay it back the fraud is wobbly at best. In the ned it is for a judge to decide if the case can be made. Yet even as I accepted what I did in 1981, there was never a step of personal or financial gain. I merely ‘allowed’ my account to be over-drafted for no more than a month and the maximum amount ‘borrowed’ would have been $500 for the best part of a week. As such the fraud setting becomes debatable but it hangs on the setting if a cheque can be written to ones self. 

As for the amount we are given “The amount of money kept by the defendants in the four lawsuits totalled more than $660,000, according to JP Morgan Chase’s lawyers” as such I wonder what other protocols (or better stated policies) were ‘glitched’ to make for easy money making by the banks. The fact that they are now turned against them is to some extent hilarious. The simplest setting is that you cannot write yourself a cheque for any amount. One simple rule that could have stopped JP Morgan Chase ‘losing’ money as I see it.

I might be wrong on this as I am not a banker. I asked Francesco di Medici and he agrees, but he reeled at the idea of a piece of paper supporting $660,000 so there is that too.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, IT, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , ,

October 29, 2024 · 15:28

Laughing Out Loud

Yup this happens too and in this case it was an article that Bloomberg showed its paying customers. I am not one of them. As such I am attaching the image that made me laugh.

I saw it about 8-10 hours ago and it had me rolling with laughter. So what gives? First the setting of ‘Consider Re-entering’ as I see it Barclays and other banks are strapped for capital and bleeding a client dry (service fees and commissions) is a tell tale story towards any bank trying to make a living. There is no consideration, there is merely the trap they put themselves in 10 years ago. As for the “capitalise on the kingdom’s growing need to access capital markets” is even more hilarious. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia has options to consider HSBC, JP Morgan, Bank of America and the 5 largest banks in China. All stronger and more able than Barclays. There is also Credit Agricole and the Citigroup. All in the top 12, Barclays stands at 18. So there is the first part. In addition I can hand you Rothschild & Co. The one bank no one mentions. It’s value was around €18.1 billion a year ago, as such I reckon it is pushing well over €20 billion at present. Barclays has nowhere near that capital or those connections. I reckon that Rothschild can access around 20% more clients than Barclays can (a casual speculation by little old me). 

So why this action?
Well it started in 2012 when we were given “Barclays is fined for manipulating the benchmark Libor interest rate in 2012, after revelations stretching back to 2005” It’s CEO C. S. Venkatakrishnan didn’t forget about that, did he? Then we get 2014 when Reuters gave us ‘Barclays sued by Saudi developer for $10 billion’, so how did that end? We got “A Saudi real estate company has sued Barclays for $10 billion (6.24 billion pounds), claiming the bank ceased pursuing lease payments due from the Saudi government on military complexes in the kingdom in order to obtain a lucrative banking license there” when we were given (source: Reuters) “The company, Jadawel International, a unit of London-based MBI International Holdings Inc., claims Barclays “hatched a fraudulent scheme” to secure the rare Saudi banking license, selling out Jadawel in the process, according to the lawsuit filed in New York state Supreme Court on Tuesday” One says potato and the other claims tomato. In the end as far as I can tell Barclays won the dismissal. It doesn’t make them innocent, but the claimant could not prove guilt (as far as I can tell). And last but not least only this year we were given that Barclay was one of the players in getting Andrea Orcel “derivatives linked to Commerzbank for the Italian lender in the weeks before Berlin sold a stake earlier this month, sources familiar with the matter said. Barclays and Bank of America subsequently helped Orcel to effectively expand UniCredit’s holding in Commerzbank to the current level of about 21 per cent, they said asking not to be named discussing the private information” now, this last bit does not seem to be illegal, but the stakes against Barclay (all over Europe) are increasingly high and now they hope that Saudi Arabia gives them a chunk of business before they are forced to hand over their bank to any of the upper 15 banks. I say good luck to them. Yes there is all kinds of banking issues I am not familiar with, but governments need to work with banks that are cleaner then clean and as such I am entertaining howls of deriving laughter if Barclay thinks they are that. The LIBOR scandal took care of that. 

And lets be clear Barclay didn’t (as far as I know) hand the statement “Mistakes were made in the past and we have sanitised our structures and people to meet the challenge that a customer the size of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia brings”, nope, none of that. We were given “Barclay plc is considering re-entering Saudi Arabia as it looks to capitalise on the kingdom’s growing need to access capital markets”. I actually wonder if they would be allowed in the country at present. There are seemingly better viable candidates and that is before you consider Rothschild as a contender. 

I get it. I also tried to access Saudi Arabia as a partner (read: future owner) of my IP. I merely wanted 50 million, a Canadian passport and 2% of the revenue for 20 years. With my believe (a presented believe) that the idea would give them 6 billion annual and their investment to that would be 50 million (for happy old me). And this is about as decent as it gets. A mere 0.8% risk and that is at the time of the presentation. A mere trivial amount and I feel certain that this would have worked. There was one condition Microsoft was not allowed near it. Amazon would be OK, but Microsoft is a no go.

This is why I contacted Kingdom Holdings and Tencent Technology as well. They can drive the innovation I brought. As such I feel a stronger contender than Barclay ever could be (Yes, I am blowing my own horn).

So as I see it, re-entering a market when the others have seemingly had enough of you isn’t re-entering. It is running for the hills to avoid being taken over. But I am not a banking person, so what do I know.

Have a fun day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

October 9, 2024 · 01:07

When the credit card stops

That is the setting for the US of A. The BBC gives us ‘US debt would increase under Harris and soar under Trump – study’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce81g9593dro). We are given that there is basically no escape for America, I have articles going back to 2018 where I give sight of what is coming. Oh, and by the way at what point do you cancel someones credit card? We are given “Donald Trump’s campaign proposals would increase the US national debt by double the amount Kamala Harris’s would, according to a new analysis by a non-partisan group.” We are also given “Trump would add $7.5tn” now consider that the interest on this would be around 450 billion, just on the increase alone. Now consider that the total debt is 500% larger and now consider that the US economy needs to come up 2.25 Trillion EACH YEAR to deal with the interest alone and I saw that coming 5 years ago and the news media and these so called financial experts never saw this? I do not believe this. We were all told and presented a story. And they are about to lose whatever leeway they thought they could hang over us. The media was the tool some were able to use (with what I speculatively see) as stake holders to ‘bring’ the presentation. And the media seemingly was left in the dark, or were they?

The problem is that we cannot see or prove any of this. But consider that I saw this coming for over 5 years and I do NOT have an economic degree. What makes you think that I am more clever than these financial wizard in the media (CNN, BBC, WSJ, the Guardian) and many more? Do you really think that they made a miscalculation? They isn’t nickel and dime stuff, this is about 35 trillion dollars. How much sneaky bookkeeping is involved to put such an amount under the tables? This would require the cooperation of media, banks and governments. So when your retirement falls away, who will you blame? The media? The Banks? The Governments? Seems ludicrous, almost some crazy conspiracy. But consider the facts. Consider the evidence and the avoidance of the media to address certain economic facts. That is not some cooky setting, the evidence is out there on the internet. Consider all the media and consider what the media never gave us. I can tell you more, but it is time to consider what I am telling you here and make your own mind up. 

Now consider that the EU had six trillion euros in taxable revenue in 2022. Now we see that America is optionally about to increase its debt more that the taxable income of 27 countries and it does not raise an issue? Now we know that plenty of EU countries have a GDP that equals an apple and an egg. But together they should amount to a fair amount considering that these countries have a total population of 449.2 million, which is a lot more than America (about 34%). Now consider that people pay taxation, companies pay taxation as well. But the tax breaks are mostly for companies. As such I look at the people. There is a baseline that extremely roughly applies and when that baseline is applied the numbers do not match up as I personally see it and I have seen this setting for over 5 years and the media ignores it all. 

Could I be wrong?
Yes definitely, but overall certain numbers create levels of equilibrium and I see that these numbers aren’t here at the moment. And the media seeing these debt levels fail them could also be seen as optional evidence. So how does it work? It seems clear that the media can no longer be trusted (in my opinion). So how to get the numbers? I cannot give you my sources, so you are a little on your own in that regard.

Have a great day.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

July 8, 2024 · 16:51

Two issues caught my attention.

The first issue is given to us by the BBC (at https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cx002795738o) The article starts with ‘‘I had to downgrade my life’ – US workers in debt to buy groceries’. In this I have a few speculations. You see Groceries are also set by ‘Permanent Price Adjustment’. This is what the producers of milk, bread and pretty much all items do. You see as they have costs and increased costs for whatever reasons. They pass on these cost to the shop, which in turn passes it onto you, the consumer. In the last 3 years things got to be more expensive and as such you feel that brunt. Per nation this varies. In Australia meat went up in total by 20% (over the last 3 years). Milk less so, but plenty of goods did go up and many have not seen an increase in income for years. So as we see “But after four years of rising prices, her support has worn thin – and every time she shops at the supermarket, she is reminded how things have changed for the worse. Ms Ellis works full-time as a nurse’s assistant and has a second part-time job” So in this case (as a republican minded person) I say that this is not on President Biden, not even on former president Trump. You see this is the consequence of having a $34,000,000,000,000 debt. As such businesses are taxed and as I see it, annually any administration will have to come up with $680,000,000,000 in interest alone. In 2023 the USA received (or allegedly received) $4,440,000,000,000. This implies that 15% of all taxed income goes towards interest on the outstanding debt and I have merely set that to 2%, Now consider that all costs that the government pays for is now down graded by 15% (more likely a higher percentage as the interest is also higher than 2%). Now consider that dairy, bread, meat and other options do not get incentives anymore (or at least a lot less). So there two items alone will be a lot more expensive. Then there is the operations of shops. It goes around again and again and that sets the price in many ways. There are more elements, but I am not privy to them. I warned on this several times over the last 8 years. There was going to be a problem and now people are seeing this happen and that is the beginning of draconian changes. So as Stacey Ellis and others see this happen, they go into ‘blame mode’ but they are blaming the wrong people. This is a failing of the entire administration and it started with former president George W. Bush in 2001. Former president Bill Clinton was the last president where green ink was gracing the US books of accounting. In 24 years all presidents have been pushing the debt forward. There was no exit strategy, just the wishful thinking that ‘tomorrow would be a better day’ and now after 24 years it is close to over. Not just in the USA, Europe is in a near similar place. That is what China had been hoping for so as they set the pressure even higher by getting the better deals, the west and others see the unfolding of economic disasters. And I am no economist! So there is the setting that plenty of others (real economics) should have known this and should have pushed for changes and taxing the rich was never an option. When government overreach with their Credit Card for 10%-20% more annually, at some point the card decline point is reached and that is where we are now. The USA, EU nations and others are getting their cards declined. Banks aren’t able to extent loans and whilst some are creative to pass credits via other nations. The banks are realising that the game is almost over. They might have a few options left but that will depend on how creative they can get. For this (also my speculative view) I point at Silicon Valley Bank (SVB), Silvergate Bank and Signature Bank. Three banks in 2023 with failures. Yet the media never looked at the abundant government loans they had in their books, it was my speculative view that their bonds were an overreach. So else did Janet Yellen keep a close view? At this point we were given ‘US prosecutors probing collapse of Silicon Valley Bank’ which was March 2023 and after that? Nothing as I can tell, as such spokespeople for the SEC, SVB and the Justice Department declined to comment. That was more than a year ago. So why isn’t the media doing their job? These are all elements of a nation that is running out of money and they are afraid to give out the real deal. I get it, it makes sense but it also means that life in the USA will be getting more and more expensive and when small farmers are breaking with the usual trend and start merely supplying their villages and their ‘friends’ the game changes even further. The big players cannot make claims they downgraded small farmers too often so that will have increased pressures to life in the city. And before you classify that this does not matter, be aware that 90% are small farms in the US. So when they hold back 10% of their farmed good for personal settings prices will be driven up even further. There is a setting where the old times could come back. I remember in the 60’s that I went to the potato farmer in a small shop in the street. That time could be back and it will implode most supermarkets. The stage is almost there that the supermarkets will be too expensive for potatoes, vegetables, fruit, dairy products and meat. When that happens the implosion that it sets off will be seen all over the US, especially in the metropolitan regions. Europe will not be far behind that. 

They are all intertwined so the first one to go will push the others over the edge. And when super markets go, where will you get your shopping? I reckon that California will hold out the longest, but in the end they too will have a problem. For the EU nations, France and Germany will hold out the longest. The UK will hold out, but how they will fare is anyones guess. I reckon that London will be the larger problem. The other cities are closer to rural regions, but for them I cannot say how it will evolve. 

So whilst the BBC gives us the partial goods. We need to see that the Stacey Ellis is but an element of a much larger problem and the media had the information for the longest of times. So why did they not inform you? Which stakeholders were part of the problem? All questions that too many are afraid to ask about. 

Have a great day (Second issue in next story).

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

January 31, 2024 · 00:11

Forbes Foreboding Forecast

Yup, it happens. Sometimes the others are all on your train ride, but that does not make your prediction true. Yet to see this we need to take the whole image into consideration. For me I saw this come towards us like a freight train without any brakes when I wrote about it as early as September 2020. I wrote several times that these settings were a really bad setting and the outcome would not be a nice one. Then I warned that the US economy had nowhere to go, not when they insult and offend Saudi Arabia (and to some extent the UAE), as such China would gain billions in revenue. We saw last month (could have been 2 months ago), news that America was ‘worried’ about China making so much headway into the middle East. And now Forbes (at https://www.forbes.com/sites/digital-assets/2024/01/29/the-us-dollar-is-finished-wall-street-legend-warns-trumps-and-bidens-china-nightmare-is-suddenly-coming-true/) gives us ‘The U.S. Dollar Is ‘Finished’—Wall Street Legend Warns Trump’s And Biden’s China Nightmare Is Suddenly Coming True’. Really? First off, this isn’t suddenly, I made mentions for almost 4 years that this stage was underway. The fact that the dollar is finished is not entirely wrong, but not to the degree we see predicted. Wall Street will take any stance to diminish that danger. People will end up with nothing, but the almighty dollar will sail on, even though the galleon it once had will be replaced by a simple sloop (as piracy goes). 

So whilst we get “The U.S. dollar is “finished as the world’s reserve currency,” analyst Richard X Bove told the New York Times just days after his retirement from a storied 54-year career as a Wall Street analyst.” I initially tend to agree. Yes the dollar as a reserve currency is pretty much a bye bye black sheep operation. It is the “Bove, who sees bitcoin and cryptocurrencies as winning in a post-dollar dominant world, predicted that China will overtake the U.S. economy” part I do not completely agree with. You see the Yuan is and will be an important part of the global economy, but China has its own skeletons to deal with. Evergrande is one and that $300,000,000,000 issue will hinder the Chinese economy to a massive degree. Not to mention the Chinese population that is hurt by that loss. I reckon that being related to Shawn Siu in China is a lot more dangerous than being a loudmouthed disrespectful American in that region, but that could merely be my take on that situation. You see, China needs both Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates to get the traction to push forward. Yes, they will push the dollar of its throne and Americans with their arrogance did this to themselves, but without the Middle East China has no real momentum. That was the larger station we needed to see. I tried to warn people, but to them I knew nothing. And true, I have no degrees in economy, but I have looked into numbers for decades and I have both a creative mind to see beyond the numbers and a critical mind to question any hypothesis I have. As such I saw what is now being published as ‘suddenly’. My timeline has three years of warnings of the dangers the US and its dollar were facing. I do not have the knowledge or insight to discuss or oppose the digital currency changes, but I can tell that the ego of ex-presidents with his opposition to the digital dollar will be the end of the American economy. The digital dollar would allow Wall Street to diminish the impact the slam the dollar is about to make. If that stops the damage will be enormous. I don’t think the US economy will have any cards to play. Especially now that the EU nations are vying for the same defence contracts that were once almost uniquely America alone. With France, the UK and Germany vying for whatever spending dollars they can, China might end up with a little less, but they still have a lot of billions coming their way, all billions lost to America now and the EU is trying to get a few as well, an indoor fight between the US and EU is not one they were ready for and overall the American evangelisers are now starting to be a lot more quiet. Money talks and the US has none left. Now that the Ukrainian Russian military debate is now three weeks away from two years. A short term prediction by the Kremlin is now a setting that they could actually lose. A stage not considered a year ago and that also brings a lot more problems to the EU nations as well as America. America that has been catering to Russian needs no less and that is important as the people are now a lot more eager to accept China as the new leader. This is not some Nixon fantasy, this is the case of Wall Street deciding on what is best for the world and that is not how it works. That only has any value in the delusional mind of some. So whilst we see what happens next, we see that the power players are vacating towards the UAE. Some will go to other destinations, but the mess that they are leaving behind (not all due to them) will leave the American population without anything left. So what do you think happens when the dollar collapses and 200,000,000 Americans see that their savings are gone. Do you really think they will will side with Trump and his multiple multi million lost lawsuits? Consider that no one has a clear view on how much he owns. Some state that he only has now less than 3 billion and he was dropped from the Forbes 400 list, he came up $300,000,000 short (a lot more with the lawsuits he lost). To give you some reference, Elon Musk is apparently 96 times wealthier. He has 9600% more wealth than Donald Trump and that is the person Americans pissed off, all whilst he has the foundations of a solution for the energy shortage they face. So how is ego holding up? When the UAE engages with that solution, America will come up short in funds and energy. So the ‘suddenly’ setting wasn’t there. This has been out in the open for up to 4 years. And that picture goes from bad to worse soon enough. 

Could I be wrong?
It is a fair question and I ask myself that question pretty much every day. It is not indecisiveness, it is not doubt. It is about verifying the numbers again and again from whatever reliable source I can find. Verification is everything. Richard X Bove and I got to the same conclusions via different ways and as such I wonder why others were never on that page. Why was the media not all over this? They were so ready to protect Elizabeth Holmes and Sam Bankman-Fried, but this they didn’t see? Ask yourself that question and wonder what else they got wrong and more importantly why did they get that wrong. You might come to some conclusions that will scare you. Mainly because you all worked towards your retirement, but how many funds saw the golden future that the dollar bonds brought? When that falls flat your retirement will be gone and there is no coming back from that. I think that a few banks in America, as well as Credit Suisse Group AG (now part of UBS), isn’t it interesting that none of them were properly investigated by the media? They all gave the same story, but no one looked into how many dollar bonds these banks had. It might be nothing, but I doubt it. You see, Credit Suisse was handed a $54 billion lifeline. The fact that ANY bank needed THAT MUCH money was never properly investigated and it wasn’t just them. We see all the claims, but to need a 54 billion lifeline implies that that piece of rope is made from weaved platinum threads with diamonds. When did you ever need a lifeline like that?

And these places all matters, because that is to some extent the impact that the dollar pushed for, at least that is how I personally see it. There will be plenty of people stating that I am wrong, but after 4 years I have been proven correct too many times. Let them come up with verifiable data and clear sources to prove me wrong. I dare them.

Enjoy the day, my Wednesday just started.

1 Comment

Filed under Finance, Media, Politics

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

August 12, 2023 · 22:39

How on earth?

This was my first thought that went through my mind. It came from the BBC and I was reading this in a decent degree of unknowing. The title ‘China property giant Country Garden warns of up to $7.6bn loss’ (at https://www.bbc.com/news/business-66470170) where we see “Country Garden, which is one of China’s biggest property developers, has warned that it could see a loss of up to $7.6bn (£6bn) for the first six months of the year” and I am quite frankly at a loss. You see, a developer gets (read: buys) a piece of land, he places a building on it and sells this place(s) and in the end there is a profit, it might not always be a great profit, but a profit nonetheless. So when I see a loss of $7.6bn, the math in my head goes that at $250K it sets the stage for 30,400 houses and if a place costs 1.5 million we see the bungling of 5,065 places. Now it is not that simple. I get that, but the idea that someone set a stage where 30,400 houses are sold for $0 is equally laughable, implying that the problem is a lot larger than we can see. We saw it in the UK with Carillion, we saw a few examples and they all wanted ALL the profit and as such they did it all, all the elements of construction and all elements of the service. That never works, the moment a short cut is made, people start filling to holes and creating more holes in the process. 

Then there is the larger financial impact. How does a company like Country Garden has any setting that allows for that kind of a loss in the first 6 months? Even as the article gives us “The expected loss compares to a $265m profit for the same time last year. The firm also said it has set up a special task force, headed by its chairman Yang Huiyan, to find ways to turn the business around”, I reckon it might be close to ‘too late’, which is seen with “rating agency Moody’s downgraded the company’s rating, citing “heightened liquidity and refinancing risks”” and don’t expect me to give explanations. I have none. I have a few speculation, the first we saw in the beginning. But there was also the 2021 event when 15 buildings were demolished all in one go (at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Om6b0_ffyFQ), I cannot tell you the reason, I merely saw the YouTube on USA Today, and we get that one building needs to go at times (still sloppy), but 15 buildings? Now consider those costs and I am certain that those building in total would not have surpassed $2 billion. So now consider that one developer has well over 300% of those losses. Something does not add up and I cannot tell you what it is. In the first I do not have an economics degree, I have engineering, IT and Law degrees and I am still grasping for nothing at this time. The speculation I made earlier makes the most sense of stupidity. Yet it was speculation, so I could be wrong. As such, in an age in China where there are no jobs, there is a housing shortage and there are a few more issues. The 15 building demolition raises questions, the loss by Country Garden gives even more question marks. The Financial Times gives us “Nine months later, it is dangerously short of cash. The company expects to have lost Rmb45bn-Rmb55bn in the first half of the year and is confronting what it calls “the biggest difficulties” in its history.” (At https://www.ft.com/content/c266f377-33dc-4cf6-89a1-b62998896027) and it is not the first time. Evergrande in 2021 has a massive default and it seems to me that all these firms ‘doing it all’ are imploding. Is it a mere setting of idle time? Me and idle time go way back, all the way to the early 90’s and it is not the first time that idle time is overlooked or seen as a linear event, which it is not. It does not explain these billions of loss, it really does not but to see this in China implies that there is a lot more going on than we are able to see and that is never a good thing.

Enjoy the weekend.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Media

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

February 6, 2013 · 17:56

It hurts every time, but we love it

So, in this fifth part, we will have a little look at the UK banks that were hit lately. This is a progression from previous parts. Not because they were linked (they might be, but I gave no deeper look at that). The important reason is that the banks are doing more than setting a trend. This is all a continuation when banks became more then service providing organisation. They became profit driven. Instead of the normal profit of continuation it became driven to the optional profit of speculation. Even though most banks would argue that this is the way to go, the Netherlands showed how their banks lost to the amount of 40 billion Euros. This pretty much covers more their current deficit. There is also the continuation of thought on the decision makers. How can we be allowed to sit down and see how a group of less than 100 took decisions that would cripple a nation on narrated limitations like ‘miscommunications’, ‘blunders’ and sheer incompetence? More astounding is that following the acts, some decided to look at advices from corporations losing utter fortunes (Source: Telegraaf, 31st October 2012).

This is not just about the fact that we are dependent on a very small group of people. We are confronted that they are just people, with needs and dark desires. A group having ‘ideal’ dreams and writing checks a lot larger than their ego could ever cover.

So what to do?

Let’s take a look at three groups.
The Bank of Scotland, The Lloyds banking group (of which the Bank of Scotland is now a part) and Barclays.

In 2012 the LIBOR scandal got a hold of many (London InterBank Offered Rate), There were accusations and proof was given. As LIBOR affects the US market and it was seen as a violation of American law. The UK version of the Telegraph reported that the chancellor had made it clear that any financial penalty imposed by American regulators must be paid for by bankers, and not the taxpayer. (Source: The Telegraph).

From my side the first thought was that it might be nice if the US cleans up its own side first. I wonder how much money they reclaimed from upper management at Lehman Brothers? Interesting is the information, that those upper level ‘demons’ (aka members of the board of directors) got overall half a billion dollars in bonuses. How much was reclaimed? An example of this is Erin Callan (former CFO Lehman Brothers) who did get a nice payout and if I can believe the NY Times a new husband and moved to a high position with Credit Suisse. Now the next is really important. SHE BROKE NO LAWS! (As far as we know). Also, there does not seem to be any evidence of any kind that she lied. She has been portrayed as a ‘girl’ who was in over her head. That is hard for me to comment on, but it does raise certain questions. There seems to be a board of directors who seem to play the multi-billion dollar game like it is a round of Parcheesi. To debunk a trillion dollar company and then walk away with half a billion should result in more than just global questions. That part is important as at the end there were dealings with Barclays who had a small non illegal windfall. Now business is business, yet it does show that a certain game that was played in the US seems to be played in the UK to the extent that is now the LIBOR scandal.

 

How does this link to the Netherlands and the UK?

Well, look at the reports on how percentage bases are calculated and how it reflects not on ACTUAL debt, but based on how these debts relate to Gross National Product and how these things influence the DOW. So it is in the interest for all to keep certain numbers high. Especially for the greed driven! This is the real problem from my train of thought. Considering what I wrote over the last weeks means that the Greedy need the DOW index to move higher and higher. Yet, all the numbers give me an indication, especially when we see a global depression that those numbers should not go up the way they do. It feels to me that other factors are influencing it all. The US with the fiscal cliff (Fiscal Abyss seems more accurate). Many EEC nations are in massive debt, and then hit with waves of unemployment, higher costs, declining standard of living and no direct prospect that this will improve. People are not spending the way they did. The housing market is breaking down in several nations and so on.

So consider the next nightmare. If the DOW index drops 4,000 points to 10,000. What then? Too many people seem to ignore parts, others want to control parts and those in charge want to rule, so when it does collapse, they maintain whilst none survive.

This same view seems to be happening now in the UK. The controlling of percentages to LIBOR is only a first. A lot of these reports like the one the BBC showed in August 2012 mentioned that this system must change. This was spoken by Martin Wheatley of the Financial Services Authority. He also mentioned discrepancies going back to 1991. This means that some level of manipulation has been going on for over 20 years. So is this about ACTUAL justice, or is it that the US had become SO desperate for as strong as a hand as possible that they pulled a Benedict Arnold against their own banking ‘buddies’. For the UK readers, Benedict Arnold is the American version of Edward Devenney.

Another party in LIBOR is Barclays. They dealt in services that rely on LIBOR, by intentional misrepresenting information they got better deals and therefor more profits. The problem is that using Derivatives in this way and the involved banks’ lending money to each other it becomes a musical chair exercise in passing pieces of paper from one bank to the other. From my viewpoint it could be seen as adding funny money to the internal till and amassing profits from something that was not there. And as they moved hand to hand, they kept the margin of profit that LIBOR offers.

So the following step is reforming this. The UK government seems to be happy to accept all upgrades that Martin Wheatley suggested. However, Reuters reported on the 28th of September 2012 that these changes would add volatility to the short term markets. They also reported that the FSA (the place Martin Wheatley is from) mentions that this standard is too entrenched to replace. It seems that banks on a global scale are too afraid to rock any boat. Is it a fear that their united spread sheets are altered to remove their layer of manipulating? If that is so then their powers would soon be diminished. It seems clear to me that markets are manipulated on several levels and those in charge are in no mood to change any of it. That situation becomes a lot more volatile when you consider the US debt of 17 trillion dollars in addition to the Fiscal Abyss. Those two, when a change is set might mean that the US could be bankrupted overnight.

 

Any claim that this will never happen is slightly moot. Here we now get back to the Netherlands where the same was claimed of the SNS Bank. It is now nationalised. Many nations should now be contemplating massive change to remove the power of banks as we can no longer afford THEIR life style.

It is interesting that the UK is under such scrutiny by the US, yet the US is nowhere near on cleaning its own banks (in my humble opinion). This does not mean that nothing should be done. And it does not mean that they should not have done anything. There is however the question on how those could be improved (as I have asked myself and on my blog in several situations).

So we get to the Lloyds banking group. In January 2013, 8 people were charged connected to a $55,000,000 corruption scandal. (Source: AP). This is not the only issue. Ian Fraser, an award winning Journalist, who reported amongst others for the BBC and Thomson Reuters has a lot more on his blog http://www.ianfraser.org. If anyone wants to question his education? Well the man was ‘shaped’ by St. Andrews (the University, not the Saint), which means he should be regarded as a member of the highest echelon in his profession. In addition, when we look at the board of directors of the banks we mentioned earlier, then we see more than just casual links. Some of them had positions at Citigroup, the FSA, The Royal Bank of Scotland, the US Treasury, JP Morgan Chase, International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) and more. This seems to remain a very small inner circle in-crowd.

It is clear that a lot more has happened and even more is happening. This is not even the complete story, but we have clear evidence spanning 2 continents that several nations have a collection of banks where it is all about the profit. Looking at the ‘blunders’ where they were willing to bet the house on all of it. So I feel that clear, visible and vocal oversight of these parties is a given essential need!

Please consider this last part. The UK banks involved in regard to the corruption case and the LIBOR scandal consists of 4 of the 5 large UK banks. It sounds harsh however this implies 80% of the UK banks have prosecutable issues. This is more than a scary statistic. I would take a guess that these 4 banks are controlled by boards of directors and they would add up to less than 75 persons. What happens when they in the same fashion as the Dutch SNS agree that ‘blunders’ were made? Could the UK survive a hit that large? More important will be the question whether the results also impact their siblings Canada and Australia?

Several questions and I expect that no clear answers will be forthcoming (any day soon). A political step could be in the form of carefully phrased denials and years of closed door meetings.

For me the conclusion from what I have seen over the last few weeks is that oversight is a must, there should be a clear list of definitions that the financial world must openly agree on and that there must be an open list of those involved in those standards.

As I close this final part of my reflections, the hope is that you enjoyed these five blogs.

These series were my thoughts on the Financial Banking Blunders as set in:

  • Greed and the lack of common sense.
  • Time for another collapse.
  • The future of greed.
  • A solution by annexing greed?
  • It hurts every time, but we love it.

I will try to take an evolving look at banking laws in a future blog.

2 Comments

Filed under Finance, Law

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,