anyone knowledgeable on the markets here? THIS CANT BE GOOD!!

He did say sorry:...In November of last year I made a full apology, unreserved apology, both personally and on behalf of the Board, and I am very happy to repeat that this morning. We were particularly concerned at the serious impact on shareholders, staff and, indeed, the anxiety it caused to customers...

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmselect/cmtreasy/uc144_vii/uc14402.htm

 

Odon...Now that was clear and concise, slightly witty and not too much sting. As responses go, I'd give it a 9 out of 10.

In reference to the "Top BAnker" that's a Chemist...Now that would be a "Top Chemist" then now wouldn't it? It just so happens that he might run a bank. Still, I would assume that they didn't have a team of "Top Chemists" running the bank. I would suppose that at least a couple of the executives had a background in banking or finance?


I'm sorry, I don't usually follow links, I'm generally too lazy and disinterested, but I'm sure your facts are good. I'm also sure that it was a fine school that you attended, you seem a smart enough fellow. We just don't see things the same way here. Oh and one last thing...I bet you didn't know that the Scouts are secretly tied to the illuminati...:cheers2:

 

Thanks.

I'll be fair.
I perhaps should have said: The heads of many financial institutions were not "money men"; proffesional bankers.
Their specialities were in completely other spheres.
To say they were "top bankers" is perhaps not that accurate because they would have to be bankers in the first place (this could get messy ).
I was perhaps being slightly disingenuous.
But what else could I have called the men at the top?

I'll be fair again.
The e.gs I give have had many years of financial experience and it seems you have to be approved by the fsa (financial services authority).
You do have to have some banking/financial compitence.
If you can not be lazy for a minute...the link I gave http://www.publications.parliament.u...ii/uc14402.htm does say their experience and credentials more fully than I have given them credit.
I do appreciate, also, one person is not running a bank on their lonesome.
The point is though, these people were adapting to a particular business.
In this case a bank.
If they were perhaps career bankers and not just compitent managers, we may not have gotten in this mess.

The banks that started all of this were headed by people who had no prior banking profiency before they decided they would like to effectively run a bank. The ones that did not fall down - as they did (but were affected by the actions of a few banks) - were/are not headed by those types of people for the most part.
Even though I have a slight problem with the truth of HHBs last comment, I still share his cynicism.

You'll perhaps never know.

It was ok. I learnt more from life though.

I don't doubt it.