Rolling UK Economy Into The Shitbin Thread

every C-level executive is part of the marketing effort!!

ask seth godin!!!

That whole Bear deal reeks of pre panic

-- Dandy Don Weiner, Monday, March 17, 2008 12:46 PM (Yesterday) Bookmark Link

the spectacular run on Bear's liquidity was the panic... If the same happens to Lehman (however unlikely) the shitbin will burst.

The share prices of the banks got a hammering today. RBS at 304p, HBOS at 460p. It was 1000p+ less than 12 months ago.

HBOS at 460p. It was 1000p+ less than 12 months ago.

We sold at 1087p :)

so.....do we believe that the hbos business this week was all down to 'rogues shorting the market'?

they still went and got their extra funding from the boe, right? even though they told us they didn't need it when they were blaming it on the rogue shorters?

Anyway this is what the banks wanted after Northern Rock, to be able to go get funding in secret. For them to complain now about this, when it was them that wanted transparency moved is ridiculuous. more likely that it is just fig leaf bluster

I love it how the losers in these situations always blame people shorting the market when actually what they mean is "I wish I'd thought of/been able to do that".

"Debt-Gorged British Start to Worry that the Party is Ending"

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/business/worldbusiness/22debt.html?_r=1&scp=2&sq=england+debt&st=nyt&oref=slogin

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Queen_cancels_party_to_mark_wedding_anniversary/articleshow/2911091.cms

even the queen thinks recession has come to UK

Does anyone have any idea what the point of todays rate cut actually is?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7288909.stm

Suppose we discover that before the economy gets back on track to normal growth of 2.25% to 2.5%, it endures two years of 1.5% growth.

That is far from the worst outcome one can imagine. But it leaves the economy permanently about 1% or 2% smaller than the chancellor has been assuming.

That small error would translate into a permanent annual deterioration in government revenues of about £9bn. When you add that to the shortfall we already have, you are half way to a very nasty problem.

In addition, raising large amounts of new money from the public - in return for no extra services - might feel somewhat uncomfortable when a significant economic slowdown is underway.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/carole_cadwalladr/2008/04/albion_come_to_great_confusion.html

slightly emotional yet schadenfreude-tinged piece -- it's basically otm, though, that this whole thing has been a ridiculous pyramid scheme.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7351073.stm

Anyone else think this is a bad idea? Where is the punishment for the bank's executives and shareholders for making such bad business decisions?

Indicative of anything or not, I don't know, but this is a pretty big case of tits-upness:

http://www.soundonsound.com/forum/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=610091&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1#610091

Never knew they owned Turnkey. I'd have thought that it's more of a Fopp-style screw-up than 'oh noes uk musicians aren't splashing the cash anymore', but I know nothing anyway.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/08/uk_politics_enl_1210682649/img/1.jpg

I don't know what the fuss is about with those notes. Seems completely right for a minister to have various scenerios to hand and for a minister to be also reminded to make some point about 'being on the publics side'.

Really, it's getting like this government can't even do a completely normal thing (like have private notes for a meeting) without it appearing in some way sinister.

What I don't understand is why, as I would have done by now if I were Gordy, he just doesn't give up, force a confidence vote or something. Clearly there's a load of treacherous bastards on the backbenches panicking about their seats. There's going to be nothing but bad news for a year or more. Why put yourself through it?

This is why I am not a politician though I guess.

The govt are encouraging people to enter a market (including via disgraceful shared ownership schemes) that in private they admit is going to have at least 10% falls

Really, it's getting like this government can't even do a completely normal thing (like have private notes for a meeting) without it appearing in some way sinister.

momentum is a bitch.

Laxalt, what should the government do then?

It's all part of the plan, locking them in with negative equity will stop them from emigrating.

Yeh, government ministers can't go around saying that market is going to fall 10% or it automatically becomes true and falls even further than it would have.

And don't tell what they "should have done" either.
xp

i dunno

- make a stronger commitment to affordable housing
- buy up languishing residential buildings and rent them out as council flats
- insert a million other sensible progressive ideas here

It's not as if the housing market is going to fall 10% across the board. The idea of a decent quality house in a reasonable area of London doing so seems faintly preposterous.

But yes, Tracer OTM.

I'm aware of the above! That is why it is news. Obviously the govt cannot admit to the economic situation for the reasons outlined above. But when there own memos admit to it at the same time that they go on television to attempt to persuade people to go into the market

In the same way that internal memos which said "lol there are no wmds in iraq" being photographed from afar would have also been news

The idea of a decent quality house in a reasonable area of London doing so seems faintly preposterous.

Why?

I'm not saying they won't fall, but 10%?

decent quality houses in reasonable areas of london fell 20%+ last time around

More than that, I think, up to 35% (last time).

What sort of worries me about those notes is that they're just basic ideas that somebody doing an economics A-level would have realised by now. Like the government has no more insight into this than your average "Evanomics" reader.

Is possible that this was staged;)

rest of memo is the same old rubbish they spout to the public. people know falls are here, this pretends falls of only 10%

unless they actually really believe the nonsense on that sheet. in which case...its no wonder we're at where we're at now

(I can glibly say that because I'm not trying to buy a house in this market).

Economics A-Level, learning the Oligopoly graphs etc. off by heart! Ah, those were the days!

Historical figures here: http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/historical.htm

In the worst affected area (the 'Outer South East') property prices fell by 36% between the summer of 1989 and the end of 1992 (and by about 32% in London during the same period) and took until the autumn of 1999 to get back up to their 1989 levels.

It does say "speaking notes" at the top of the page, which would suggest this is the a-level stuff anyway.

Those are nominals prices too presumably - real falls would have been more pronounced.

TBH the only reason I'd buy a house was if I was planning on never moving out of it ever, the idea of a 'ladder' existing, or worrying about a sale price, is kind of alien to me. Ten years doesn't seem that long in this context. I'm not the best person to be involving myself in this debate really.

Considering the UK economy is so tied to houses (unlike say Germany) it will affect all regardless of whether own or rent

Matt - is it just the idea of a property ladder that you find weird, or the idea of ladders in general?

It is specifically the idea of property ladders - I associate actually buying a house with a settled period of eg more than ten years, it's entirely a personal thing. I accept that for people who need to move around for work reasons or have kids or whatever things are very different.

Haha spot the flaky commitmentphobe.

So you have no problem with the ladders that window cleaners use?

Kind of scary.

Those are nominals prices too presumably - real falls would have been more pronounced

I hadn't thought of that. Inflation was much higher then. Apparently the RPI rose nationally by just under 25% between the summer of 89 and the winter of 92, so that would make the real fall in house prices in London and the south east more like 50-60%.

I think the above is correct and that a larger proportion of the falls this time around may be experienced almost entirely nominally, as opposed to the crash 18 years ago when it was partially nominal and partially hidden by inflation, and the 'hidden' crash 18 years before that when it was entirely masked by inflation

Of course there is some dispute at the moment as to wether the CPI/RPI reflect real inflation right now.