Could the Bank of England end up taking over the Co-op Bank?

One of the consequences of the credit crunch and the consequent banking bailouts is the way that the banks dominate financial life. We can in fact take that further because in the same way that British Airways was described as a pension fund with an airline subsidiary can we now be described as a financial sector with a real economy subsidiary? It so often feels like that.

Actually there is some fascinating number-crunching we can do as banks interact with central banks and as so often ECB (European Central Bank) gives us food for thought. Earlier @insidegame pointed out this.

ECB deposit facility usage €495.763 billion.

Interesting that banks are so willing to deposit at an interest-rate of -0.4% is it not? That hardly suggests confidence in the system. Well there is another 955.27 billion Euros held by them in the ECB current account at the same -0.4% interest-rate. Indeed at a time of apparent economic success someone is also borrowing some 590 million from the Marginal Lending Facility.

Marginal lending facility in order to obtain overnight liquidity from the central bank, against the presentation of sufficient eligible assets;

There is more to consider as we note that what is supposed to be a penal interest-rate is a mere 0.25%.

Co-op Bank

This is an institution about which Taylor Swift might well have written “trouble,trouble,trouble” for. This morning the Co-op group has announced this.

As a minority investor in The Co-operative Bank, the Co-op Group is supportive of the plan to find the Bank a new home. We will continue to work with the Bank and other investors through the process. We are focused on finding the best outcome for our members, two million of whom are Bank customers, as well as the members of our shared pension scheme which is well funded and supported by the Group. Our goal is to ensure the continued provision of the type of co-operative banking products our members want.

So the bank is up for sale and my immediate thought is who would buy it and frankly would they pay anything? Only last week Bloomberg put out some concerning analysis.

Co-Operative Bank Plc, the British lender that ceded control to its creditors three years ago, has plunged in value to as little as 45 million pounds ($56 million), according to people familiar with the matter.

The shares are privately owned so prices are not published but we are told this about trading and prices.

Shares in the Manchester, England-based lender, which don’t trade publicly, are quoted between 10 pence and 30 pence by investment banks offering private trading among institutional investors, said the people who asked not to be identified because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly. The shares were worth about 3 pounds after the bank was rescued by bondholders in 2013, falling to about 50 pence in September before plummeting in recent weeks amid questions over its financial strength, the people added.

There are two initial issues raised by this. The first is that “worth” is not the same as price and related to that I would say that the £3 price after the 2013 rescue was a combination of a false market and wishful thinking. In a closed private market, how can I put this? You can pretty much price it as you like and wait and see if anyone is silly enough to buy at that price? I think we are clear now that the answer was no! So the fall in the price has in my opinion been more an acquaintance with reality than any real change.

The institution would already have been on the radar of the Bank of England.

Co-Op Bank will probably operate below regulatory capital guidance until at least 2020, the bank said Jan. 26, as it replaces crumbling IT systems and separates its pension fund from its former parent.

One thing that raises a wry smile is that the banks are always described as having “crumbling IT systems”. How can this be when pre credit crunch we were told that they were run by people of such talent that they deserved vast salaries and remuneration packages? Someone should try a case for miss selling there. I believe the Co-op Bank has now outsourced such matters to IBM.

The Prudential Regulation Authority or PRA has been looking into this although its moves are awkward in the sense that they give the Co-op bank another downwards push.

The PRA increased its so-called Pillar 2A capital requirements, financial buffers linked to a lender’s idiosyncratic risks, to 14.1 percent of risk-weighted assets in November. By contrast, the level set for Lloyds Banking Group Plc, Britain’s largest mortgage lender, is 4.5 percent.

Bonds,Bonds Bonds

There is no bull market here indeed we see the reverse as the Co-op Bank’s bonds have seen quite a bear market.

The bank’s 206 million pounds of junior bonds due December 2023 dropped 4 pence to 45 pence on the pound on Wednesday, according to data compiled by Bloomberg, while 400 million pounds of senior bonds maturing in September this year were little changed at 85 pence, with a yield of 34.5 percent.

In these times of zero and indeed negative interest-rates which we reminded ourselves about at the opening of this article an interest-rate of 34.5% can be described thus.

Danger, Will Robinson! Danger!

The official view is quite different as the BBC explains.

The bank has four million customers and is well known for its ethical standpoint, which it says makes it “a strong franchise with significant potential” when it comes to a sale.

This seems like a reality was a friend of mine moment, or of course perhaps viewed through the prism of its previous drug-taking chairman Paul Flowers, who pursued the new methods of counting GDP with quite an enthusiasm. Meanwhile the last Fitch Report told a different tale.

Co-op Bank’s relaunch is crucial for it to become a viable business, but losses and capital erosion continue to hamper its progress. We expect Co-op Bank to report losses until at least 2017, and significant investment in new systems could extend losses into the medium term. Profitability should begin to benefit in 2018 when fair value adjustments related to the 2009 acquisition of Britannia Building Society are fully unwound.

Comment

This is a sad, sad story as there is much to recommend mutual organisations although of course much of that disappeared in the 2013 rescue. When the credit crunch hit there were hopes ( including mine) that the mutual system might help but sadly it has done little if any better than the share owned banks. The same greed culture ravaged it and may yet ravage us as taxpayers. This is particularly disappointing from an organisation which has promoted itself ad being based on ethical foundations.

Right now the Bank of England will be trying to encourage and goad someone into buying this. The problem is that the shortlist at the moment has one maybe which is the TSB. The problem in my opinion is that when a bank has trouble the record is simply that so far we have never been told the full truth at the beginning. A bit like the rule that you never buy a share until the third profit warning. After all if the outlook was good the hedge funds would keep it wouldn’t they? So there remains a genuine danger that the Bank of England will end up stepping up and apply its new bank resolution procedure. At such a time it would be on my timeline for such events.

5. The relevant government(s) tell us that they are stepping in to help the bank but the problems are both minor and short-term and are of no public concern.

6. The relevant government(s) tell us that the bank needs taxpayer support but through clever use of special purpose vehicles there will be no cost and indeed a profit is virtually certain.

7.Part-nationalisation of the bank is announced and taxpayers are told that a profit will result from this sound and wise investment.

8. Full nationalisation is announced to the sound of teeth being pulled without any anaesthetic.

As to the individuals concerned there is this.

It is also announced that nobody could possibly have forseen this and that nobody is to blame apart from some irresponsible rumour mongers who are the equivalent of terrorists. A new law is mooted to help stop such financial terrorism from ever happening again.

12. Some members of the press inform us that bank directors were both “able and skilled” and that none of the blame can possibly be put down to them as they get a new highly paid job elsewhere.

13. Former bank directors often leave the new job due to “unforeseen difficulties”.

 

 

 

Advertisements

The problems of the banks have not gone away

As we progress through 2017 we will reach the decade point for the credit crunch era especially in UK terms if we count from the collapse of the Northern Rock building society in October 2007 when it required liquidity support from the Bank of England. We are also left mulling establishment promises like this as quoted by the BBC.

Northern Rock is to be nationalised as a temporary measure, Chancellor Alistair Darling has said.

Now whilst some of it was taken over by Virgin Money giving the UK taxpayer a loss. some of it remains with UK Asset Resolution Limited.

Today, UKAR comprises of approximately 200 colleagues and is responsible for around 215,000 customers holding £33.1 billion of mortgages and loans.

Around £9 billion of that is from Northern Rock and the rest is from the failure of Bradford & Bingley which also failed. So we are left mulling the meaning of the word temporary one more time.

The next theme we kept being promised was that this time would be different and that there would be fundamental reform of the banking system. Actually that reform got kicked into the very long grass in the main and has yet to fully arrive. Back in 2011 the BBC reported it like this.

The ICB called for the changes to be implemented by the start of 2019…….The BBC’s business editor, Robert Peston, called it the most radical reform of British banks in a generation, and possibly ever.

Of course since then we have seen various delays and “improvements” to the plan as we wonder if it will ever be implemented or whether banks will collapse again first. So the reform so lauded by Robert Peston became this in February last year.

Sir John Vickers, who headed up the Independent Commission on Banking (ICB), said: “The Bank of England proposal is less strong than what the ICB recommended.”

In a BBC interview, he added: “I don’t think the ICB overdid it.”

The Bank of England rebuffed the criticism.

As ever the Bank of England moved to protect the banks rather than the wider economy.

Deutsche Bank

Today has seen yet more woe and bad news reported by Deutsche Bank which has never really shaken off the impact of the credit crunch. From Bloomberg.

The bank’s net loss narrowed to 1.89 billion euros in the three months through December, from a loss of 2.12 billion euros a year earlier. Analysts had expected a shortfall of 1.32 billion euros.

As I look at this there is the simple issue of yet another loss. After all the German economy is doing rather well with economic growth of 1.9% in 2016 and the unemployment rate falling to 5.9% with employment rising. So why can’t Deutsche Bank make any money?

Deutsche Bank took 1.59 billion euros of litigation charges in the fourth quarter, more than the 1.28 billion euros analysts surveyed by Bloomberg News had expected on average. While 2015 and 2016 were “peak years for litigation,” this year will continue to be “burdened by resolving legacy matters,” Deutsche Bank said in slides on its website.

Ah “legacy issues” which is the new version of Shaggy’s “It wasn’t me!”. Here is a breakdown of where they stand.

Last month, Deutsche Bank finalized a settlement with the Justice Department over its handling of mortgage-backed securities before 2008. The bank agreed to pay a $3.1 billion civil penalty and provide $4.1 billion in relief to homeowners. This week, it was fined $629 million by U.K. and U.S. authorities for compliance failures that resulted in the bank helping wealthy Russians move about $10 billion out of the country.

Also we have some signals as to what may be coming over the horizon.

A criminal investigation of the trades by the Justice Department is ongoing. The bank also hasn’t resolved investigations into whether it manipulated foreign-currency rates and precious metals prices.

Apart from that everything is hunky dory. If we look at this overall there is a very odd relationship between countries and banks these days. Banks get “too big to fail” support both explicitly and implicitly but they are also fined fairly regularly and hand over cash to taxpayers. Mind you some care is need here because Deutsche Bank is backed by the German taxpayer but the fines above have gone to the US and UK treasuries.

The one case where banks have some argument for saying official policy hurts them is in the case of negative interest-rates and of course the ECB has a deposit and current account rate of -0.4%. But whilst there is an element of truth in this there are also issues. The most obvious is that the banks wanted many of the interest-rate cuts that have been made and have also benefited from the orgy like amount of QE (Quantitative Easing) bond buying. The second is that the ECB has allowed them to borrow at down to -0.4% as well in an attempt to shield them.

These are bad results from my old employer and perhaps the most troubling of all is the impression created that clients are moving business elsewhere. For a bank that is invariably the worst situation. This is how it is officially put by the chairman.

Deutsche Bank has experienced a “promising start to this year,”

The share price had been on a strong run but has dropped 5% today so far.

Unicredit

Ah the banks of Italy! They seldom get far away from the news. It has seen its rights issue plan approved today as we mull why it need so much extra capital if things are going as well as we are told? From Bloomberg.

Unicredit Spa will sell new shares for more than a third less than their current price in a 13 billion-euro ($14 billion) rights offer aimed at strengthening its capital position.

The bank will sell stock at 8.09 euros a share and offer 13 new shares for every five held….. The offer price is 38 percent less than the theoretical value of the shares excluding the rights, known as TERP.

So more woe for shareholder as we note that the recent rally from around 19 Euros to just below 27 requires the perspective that the price was 423 Euros at the pre credit crunch peak. Also this is not the only rights issue that has been required.

In 2012, amid the global financial crisis, UniCredit sold shares at a 43 percent discount to raise 7.5 billion euros.

Also the mood music became a combination of grim and bullying.The offer document suggested that even with the extra capital there was no guarantee that things would be okay and hinted that if the bank did not get its money then shareholders would be even worse off if the bank failed.

It’s Chief Economist Erik Neilson (ex Goldman Sachs) is very opinionated for someone who works for an organisation that has performed so badly.

Comment

We are continually told that this time is different and that the banks have been reformed and then yet more signs of “trouble,trouble,trouble” as Taylor Swift would put it emerge. In the UK we have seen signs of yet another cover up at HBOS this week as Thames Valley Police reports.

Following a six year Thames Valley Police investigation into a complex multi-million pound fraud involving bank employees and private business advisors, six people have been convicted at Southwark Crown Court of fraud and money-laundering offences…….The fraud resulted in these offenders profiting from hundreds of millions of pounds at the expense of businesses, a high street bank and its customers.

When the Clash wrote these lines they were not thinking of the robbers working for the banks.

my daddy was a bankrobber
but he never hurt nobody
he just loved to live that way
and he loved to steal your money

These matters provide plenty of food for though as today 2 European banks take centre stage but it is like a carousel. Monte dei Paschi is now in state ownership and no doubt there will be more bad news from RBS. On and on and on it goes.

Me on TipTV Finance

http://tiptv.co.uk/inflation-quagmire-not-yes-man-economics/

Shouldn’t our banks be helping the economic recovery and not hindering it?

The last 8 years or so have seen the development of the symbiotic nature of the relationship between governments and banks. Much of this has come about by the way that central banks have set monetary policy to help banks more than the real economy. We may have seen an example of that this week from the Bank of Japan which is worried about the impact of a -0.1% interest-rate on the Japanese banks and so decided to not ease again. There we have a problem as of course they have never really recovered in the lost decade period. Another version of the symbiotic relationship is the amount of sovereign or national debt banks hold especially in the Euro area. What could go wrong with giving sovereign bonds a zero risk rating? You will not be surprised to see who is leading this particular pack. From Bloomberg.

In Europe, the issue is particularly important in Italy, where domestic state debt accounts for 10.5 percent of banks’ total assets, well above the euro-area average of 4.2 percent.

Royal Bank of Scotland

Another example of the symbiotic relationship between governments and banks has been demonstrated this morning in the interim statement by Royal Bank of Scotland or RBS.

An attributable loss of £968 million included payment of the final Dividend Access Share (DAS) dividend of £1,193 million to the UK Government.

So we see that RBS has done its best to help bail out the UK Public Finances as Chancellor Osborne finds himself able to trouser nearly £1.2 billion of extra revenue. he is probably singing Dionne Warwick.

That’s what friends are for
For good times and bad times
I’ll be on your side forever more
That’s what friends are for

Of course the UK taxpayer bailed out RBS in 2008 and ended up owning 78.3% of RBS. They were let down then because for that money they could have insisted on 100% ownership but the establishment preferred to be able to claim that the bank had not been nationalised. More recently some of the shareholding has been sold but for a loss. Currently the share price is at 243 pence compared to the 407 pence that the government claims is a break-even level. So RBS got a bailout and this year the figures of Chancellor Osborne have got one. But the taxpayer seems to be staring at losses which of course are the opposite of the profit promised back in the day. From the then Chancellor Alistair Darling.

The taxpayer, therefore, will be fully rewarded for that investment………ensuring that the taxpayer is appropriately rewarded…….

In the same statement “fully” had morphed into “appropriately” and it has been on that declining journey ever since.

The Outlook

The official view on RBS ever since this has been on the lines of the outlook is bright. If anyone has actually believe that then they must by now have been very disappointed as bad news has followed bad news! These days banks produce a litany of different profit figures an issue I raised earlier on Morning Money on Share Radio but the sentence below sums the state of play up best I think.

Adjusted operating profit(4) of £440 million in Q1 2016 was down from £1,355 million in Q1 2015 primarily due to Capital Resolution and the IFRS volatility charge.

You might reasonably think that as we are three years into a boom that banks would be doing well especially as that boom has centred on boosting mortgage lending and house prices. Indeed one might reasonably expect the numbers below to be up rather than down.

UK Personal & Business Banking (UK PBB) adjusted operating profit of £531 million was £54 million, or 9%, lower than in Q1 2015.

Still one area is booming.

Buy-to-let new mortgage lending was £1.5 billion compared with £0.8 billion in Q1 2015

If we look at the impact of RBS on the UK economy we open in troubled fashion as we note the growth of buy-to-let. But surely after all the help its has received and the UK economic recovery RBS is fit to help us back? Well not by boosting employment.

RBS remains on track to achieve an £800 million cost reduction in 2016 after achieving a £189 million reduction in the first quarter.

And this.

Capital Resolution remains on track to reduce RWAs to around £30 billion by the end of 2016 following a £1.4 billion reduction in Q1 2016.

All these years later we have job losses and deleveraging as opposed to the brave new world promised. Oh and there continues to be something of a sword of damocles hanging over it as this tweet sent to me earlier indicates.

I’m optimistic about Today we launch our action against them 4 funding/counsel in place ( @efgbricklayer )

RBS has remained what we might call accident prone as it was caught up in the Panama Papers problem and this morning this emerged as well. From the Guardian.

RBS said the Swiss regulator, the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority, had “opened enforcement proceedings against Coutts & Co Ltd (Coutts), a member of the RBS Group incorporated in Switzerland, with regard to certain client accounts held with Coutts”.

It feels like a bottomless pit does it not?

Monetary data should be good for banks

Our Martian economist might reasonably expect it to be boom time as he/she peruses this morning’s data release from the Bank of England. Let us start with mortgage lending.

Lending secured on dwellings increased by £7.4 billion in March, compared to the average of £3.6 billion over the previous six months. The three-month annualised and twelve-month growth rates were 4.7% and 3.4% respectively.

Quite a surge as we presumably see the impact of the higher Stamp Duty charge on Buy To Let purchases which is now in place but was not then. But if you really want to see numbers which are motoring take a look at this.

Consumer credit increased by £1.9 billion in March, compared to the average of £1.4 billion over the previous six months. The three-month annualised and twelve-month growth rates were 11.6% and 9.7% respectively.

If our banks cannot make money out of this when can they? That is a little ominous as we note lower mortgage approvals on the month as the Buy To Let surge fades away.

Barclays

It too seems to be failing to do its bit for the UK economy. From Bloomberg.

Following these disposals, which include the sell-down of its 62 percent stake in Barclays Africa Group, McFarlane said the bank expected group full-time employees to reduce by around 50,000 people, resulting in a total headcount of 80,000 – almost half the staff employed at its peak.

Oh and this bit could have come straight out of an episode of Yes Prime Minister.

McFarlane said he had “a lot of sympathy” with the issue of high levels of banker compensation but that Barclays was not among the highest payers in the industry and the payouts were necessary to retain top staff.

Comment

Back in 2009 the then Chancellor Alistair Darling was reported in Hansard as saying this.

They will mean strong and safer banks that are better able to support the recovery,

Actually the story of the credit crunch was that we continued to support the banks via less explicit moves that were still bailouts. For example Quantitative Easing offered them profits on government bonds and similar assets. Then the summer of 2012 saw the Funding for Lending Scheme which gave quite a subsidy to both their mortgage books and mortgage lending. So the theme of us helping them continued rather than us getting much back.

Also I note that back in 2008/09 many of the moves were badged as being to help UK businesses via bank lending. So if we add in the FLS above it should be booming right? I will let readers make up their own minds after perusing this morning’s numbers.

Net lending – defined as gross lending less repayments – to large businesses was -£1.9 billion in March. Net lending to SMEs was £0.1 billion.

We appear to have copied Japan and our version of kicking the can has left us with a banking sector which the Cranberries provide a theme song to.

Zombie, zombie, zombie
Hey, hey
What’s in your head, in your head
Zombie, zombie, zombie

Some of course seem to be even worse off. From the Financial Times

Contributions to Italy’s bank rescue fund undershoot

On The Radio