Manx Tiger Keeps Its Teeth In Recession

[Slim]

They forgot to mention failing banks.

 

Bank, not banks. And even since that failure, sterling deposits in IOM banks is up.

[jimbms]

There are other banks operating on the IOM whose parent companies have recently had to be rescued from default by taxpayers in other jurisdictions. IOM taxpayers have had to contribute NOTHING to keep banks such as Lloyds TSB and Royal Bank of Scotland in business on the IOM. Governments around the world have been generous with their own taxpayers' money to support their financial services industries.

 

But this 'generous' government in the UK took your money didn't it? Where is that £500million?

 

Thats what I would like the IOMG and the IOM Regulator to find out and ask for it back!

 

I entrusted my money to an bank in the jurisdiction of the IOMG it is not for them to say sorry we lost it but its not our fault you will just have to get it back yourself.

 

Those manx residents who had their money in the RBS are not in this situation are they ?

NO you entrusted your money to an ICELANDIC bank that happens to have a branch under the IOMG jurisdiction but who's funds came under the control of the UK govt who went on to steal your money and leave you to bleat on to the wrong govt to give you back the money out of it's tax payers pockets instead of asking the UK govt who stole your cash for it to be returned.

[Sebrof]

What Bellyache doesn't understand is that the more money is deposited with banks in the IOM, the more they will contribute to the DCS, and the quicker he'll get his money back.

 

But what is this utter nincompoop doing? He's trying to get people to take their money away. If they all did so, he'd never get a penny.

 

S

[bellyup]

Thats what I would like the IOMG and the IOM Regulator to find out and ask for it back!

 

I entrusted my money to an bank in the jurisdiction of the IOMG it is not for them to say sorry we lost it but its not our fault you will just have to get it back yourself.

 

Those manx residents who had their money in the RBS are not in this situation are they ?

 

Who says? You?

 

What if IOMG transferred and froze all of RBS's assets under some law they deemed suitable to and brought them down? Would you be happy paying it back as a taxpayer to all the depositers? Wouldn't you be asking what the IOMG were doing with the money?

 

 

As HMG supported the Lloyds group and the RBS the taxpayers are supporting those banks in the IOM.

The money was transferred from the IOMs jurisdiction by the actions of a bank in the IOM.

The regulator allowed this over 50% of the banks assets money to leave the IOM without being ring fenced or secured and sent out of his jurisdiction.

I entrusted my money to a bank in the IOM.

 

 

 

If you put something of yours lets say your lawnmower into my safekeeping and I assured you it was 100% safe

If then I put it elsewhere eg into Fred Blogg's garden and someone came along and nicked it

Whom would you hold responsible and of whom would you seek reparation?

If I then shugged my shoulders said its nothing to do with me how would you feel?

If I told you it was your fault in the first place for trusting me and told you not to so greedy as to want it back how would you feel then?

 

Suppose then comes PC PLod and says we know where your lawnmower is but its down in a deep pit in Australia with other stuff but we will recover it in time.

 

If I were honourable I would then say look old chap take my lawnmower until yours is recovered .

 

AS while I did not steal your lawnmower I should have kept a closer eye on it and feel some MORAL RESPONSIBILITY for the lost of the lawnmower.

 

The least I can do is step into your shoes and if my kids object well eventually its no skin off their noses anyway.

[scarbunny]

Is there any chance you can keep your belly aching confined to one thread? its getting a little old reading the same shit in every thread. You lost all your money we get it, so did everyone with money in the bank. You want your money talk to your government who took the 500 million from KSF and maybe they will give you it sooner, and no I don't care that Mr Brown decided this is IOMG issue he is also a tosser with no grasp on reality.

[slinkydevil]

If you put something of yours lets say your lawnmower into my safekeeping and I assured you it was 100% safe

If then I put it elsewhere eg into Fred Blogg's garden and someone came along and nicked it

Whom would you hold responsible and of whom would you seek reparation?

If I then shugged my shoulders said its nothing to do with me how would you feel?

If I told you it was your fault in the first place for trusting me and told you not to so greedy as to want it back how would you feel then?

 

Suppose then comes PC PLod and says we know where your lawnmower is but its down in a deep pit in Australia with other stuff but we will recover it in time.

 

If I were honourable I would then say look old chap take my lawnmower until yours is recovered .

 

AS while I did not steal your lawnmower I should have kept a closer eye on it and feel some MORAL RESPONSIBILITY for the lost of the lawnmower.

 

The least I can do is step into your shoes and if my kids object well eventually its no skin off their noses anyway.

 

I'd think - damn it is my fault for depositing my lawnmower with you. I could never understand why you would give me 20 bottles of beer for keeping it with you, but if I kept it with barclay bob he only gave me 5 bottles, but his shed did look more secure than yours. Yours looked like you'd bought it on special from Iceland - cheap and could easily be broken into. Oh well, PC Tony says he'll sort me out with a flymo while we try and find my lawnmower, so at least I can cut the grass. Should be thankful really.

 

I'm bored now and I was gonna try and slip in some link to 'the grass is always greener', oh well. Good luck with your getting your money back, I understand you must be upset. You've already lied once in this thread so I can't take you too seriously.

[thesultanofsheight]

While recession sweeps through Europe, one corner of the continent remains relatively untouched. On the Isle of Man the economy is growing, house prices rising and unemployment has just begun falling. Businesses are optimistic amid one of the worst global downturns for 60 years, as a recent poll of companies in key growth sectors identified by the government revealed that half expect to increase profits this year and a third hope to take on more staff ....

 

Full Item - Financial Times 29/05/2009

 

Fuck me. If I read any more of this self deluded drivel I think I might actually puke.

 

any chance of being any more specific. Which bits of the throughly objective article do you disagree with?

 

Certainly. House prices are not rising. I know that because I am house hunting at the moment and prices have actually fallen and people are prepared to take offers under the asking price I know that because that has been my experience. I also know of three companies planning redundancies so business confidence is hardly that good either - HSBC are in the process of paying off 130 and some other banks are now starting to look at programmes too. Add to this that almost every business owner I have spoken in the last 3 months has been negative on profits and earnings for this year. Many of the financial services businesess are behind target and behind the scenes many business owners would sell if only they could find a buyer.

 

This is just the usual old cobblers we print to try to demonstrate that somehow the manx economy operates in a different reality bubble to 99% of the rest of the world.

[bellyup]

What Bellyache doesn't understand is that the more money is deposited with banks in the IOM, the more they will contribute to the DCS, and the quicker he'll get his money back.

 

But what is this utter nincompoop doing? He's trying to get people to take their money away. If they all did so, he'd never get a penny.

 

S

 

If the banks didnt contribute to the DCS the IOM will have to somehow find the money.

Otherwise it would certainly announce to the entire financial world that the word the IOM means nothing.

[slinkydevil]

Oh god he's back.

[bellyup]

Oh god he's back.

 

Admit it Chickhead youve missed me

[triskelion]

If the banks didnt contribute to the DCS the IOM will have to somehow find the money.

Otherwise it would certainly announce to the entire financial world that the word the IOM means nothing.

And you would know this how? You've displayed time and again your complete ignorance of the Manx financial world; Christ knows why you think you know anything about the "entire financial world."

[bellyup]

If the banks didnt contribute to the DCS the IOM will have to somehow find the money.

Otherwise it would certainly announce to the entire financial world that the word the IOM means nothing.

And you would know this how? You've displayed time and again your complete ignorance of the Manx financial world; Christ knows why you think you know anything about the "entire financial world."

 

Its not rocket science .

 

If you say one thing but then renege you will lose trust.

 

I would actually prefer to be ignorant of the Manx Financial world if it works in this way.

[Rhumsaa]

What Bellyache doesn't understand is that the more money is deposited with banks in the IOM, the more they will contribute to the DCS, and the quicker he'll get his money back.

 

That's not strictly how it works...

 

I say strictly.... I mean at all

[Sebrof]

What Bellyache doesn't understand is that the more money is deposited with banks in the IOM, the more they will contribute to the DCS, and the quicker he'll get his money back.

 

That's not strictly how it works...

 

I say strictly.... I mean at all

 

The DCS obliges the banks to contribute in proportion to their deposits.

 

S

[chris watson]

"The Manx Herald asked Michael Weldon, Head of Banking Supervision at the FSC, how many IOM license holders would be in a position to continue trading if the ‘parent’ ceased to trade. He rather hesitantly replied that “many would be in difficulty”.

 

The UK Financial Supervision Authority (FSA) has been under pressure, in the last week or so, to release information about more extreme stress tests conducted on UK licensed banks and building societies; but has steadfastly refused to divulge the results.

 

This has led financial commentators to express the view the only reason for the reluctance to publish is they make pretty uncomfortable reading; and, therefore, may affect customer confidence.

 

Clearly the FSA and, even more so, the UK Treasury - who have already had to underwrite various banks with billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money – want to avoid adding to their problems by eroding confidence even further.

 

However, as the vast majority of the deposit takers licensed in the IOM are either branches or subsidiaries of British, Irish, Spanish and South African banking groups etc, customers of the IOM businesses are also exposing themselves to the ‘group risk’.

 

It has to be remembered most of the deposits, made in the IOM, end up in the ‘parent’s treasury’; so it makes the IOM based business highly reliant on the ‘parent/group’ continuing to trade in order to meet its own liabilities.

 

The collapse of KSF (UK) has clearly demonstrated what effect a bank collapse in another jurisdiction can have on the group business in the IOM: i.e. a ‘profitable’ bank also ends up collapsing as it can not get its hands on the cash it needs to keep trading.

 

And it is worth noting KSF (IOM) had far less exposure to the ‘group’ than many other IOM based depositor takers currently have to their group.

The Manx Herald asked Michael Weldon, Head of Banking Supervision at the Financial Supervision Commission (FSC), how many IOM license holders would be in a position to continue trading if the ‘parent’ ceased to trade. He rather hesitantly replied that “many would be in difficulty”.

However, in respect of British banks, he pointed out, despite all the difficulties, none have had a problem yet, in the sense no depositors with them have lost any money.

 

Whilst accepting this is true, so far, it was then put to him - given the experience with KSF, the ongoing uncertainty with Irish banks, and a not to be totally dismissed risk to British banks – the FSC should perhaps be doing more to protect IOM customers.

 

He offered the assurance the FSC is not “burying its head in the sand”, in respect of the turbulence still affecting markets, and is not just hoping for the best; and, added, the 2009 Annual Report, expected soon, will give more details of how they have reacted to this crisis.

 

He also maintained the FSC is “supervising banks in a way most appropriate”; and although the Manx Herald hopes that means substantially reducing IOM licensed deposit takers exposure to country and group risks – we have our doubts it does.

 

This is because the FSC’s key advice to existing and future depositors remains: “Do not put all your eggs in one basket”.

 

Whilst we agree this is eminently sensible advice – we have to ask: why then are the banks allowed to put all their eggs in one basket?

 

It is totally unsatisfactory for the FSC to expect ordinary folk - putting a few quid a way, from their wages, in a savings account – to regularly scour the financial press, and digest complicated annual company accounts, in order to conduct their own ‘due diligence’ on all our financial institutions.

 

If the public is expected to go to those lengths why do we bother with the expense of regulatory and supervisory bodies – we may as well do away with them if we have to replicate everything they do ourselves.

 

All the public wants to know is: when I put my money in this bank for safe keeping, I can get it out again when I need it; because the FSC has done the job - I thought they were being paid for - to make sure that is the case.

 

Surely that is not too much to ask; or is it?

 

Footnote:

 

You may recall the Treasury Minister, Allan Bell, among others, has been very bullish, in the last few months, about the level of deposits in the IOM, undoubtedly trying to give the impression the KSF ‘affair’ has had little, if any, impact.

 

Statements were made to the effect deposits had increased during the year, and whilst the Manx Herald didn’t doubt they may have increased pre October 2008, we were telling people to wait until the figures post October were published to get the true picture.

 

The latest figures were released by the FSC on the 29th May and, as we were expecting, there has been an outflow of deposits since November 2008.

 

Deposits (net of local inter-bank placings) with Isle of Man offices of Isle of Man banking licenceholders

Deposits decreased by £1.21 billion (-2.11%) to £56.08 billion between 31st December 2008 and 31st March 2009.

Deposits in the year to 31st March 2009 increased by £3.72 billion (7.10%) on the corresponding figure as at 31st March 2008.

Deposits (net of local inter-bank placings) with Isle of Man banking licenceholders, including those held with overseas branches of Isle of Man incorporated banks

Deposits decreased by £3.01 billion (-4.30%) to £66.95 billion between 31st December 2008 and 31st March 2009.

Deposits in the year to 31st March 2009 increased by £1.36 billion (2.07%) on the corresponding figure as at 31st March 2008.

 

The Manx Herald has been informed by several KSF (IOM) depositors, having talked to friends, relations and acquaintances, they anticipate substantial amounts more will leave, in the coming months, as a result of their experience.

 

They also plan to increase their campaign to warn prospective depositors not to be taken in by claims of ‘a well regulated jurisdiction’, ‘compensations schemes’ and ‘parental guarantees; and avoid the risk of putting their money in the IOM.

 

Can anyone blame them?"

 

http://www.manxherald.com/index.php/business/538.html

 

"The Financial Services Authority (FSA) and UK Treasury have been criticised by the Isle of Man government, which says they essentially prevented it from putting together a rescue package for the collapsed Kaupthing Singer & Friedlander Isle of Man.

 

After the collapse of the Iceland banking system, the UK froze the country's assets under terror laws, which the the Isle of Man Treasury Minister Allan Bell said was a barrier preventing it from rescuing KSF IoM.

 

Bell said: "The UK Treasury said we had to deal with the administrators, but we couldn't get enough information out of them to put together a bail out.

 

"It also seemed that the government was more concerned with the rescue of Icesave depositors at the time."

 

Bell also told FTAdviser.com that the FSA played a role in preventing it bailing out KSF IoM, because it failed to communicate with it effectively.

 

He said: "The FSA did not communicate that it had discovered problems with Kaupthing.

 

"If they had told us that they had discovered problems we may have been able to put together a rescue plan.

 

"So there needed to be improved communications from the FSA."

 

www.FTAdvisor.com