Royal Bank Of Scotland Share Discussion Threads

[leedskier] 12/2/2018 08:00

7,161.21 +68.78 (0.97%)
Real-time: 8:00AM GMT

[leedskier] 12/2/2018 08:00

The call is 7161 ... so we can see if it works.

[leedskier] 12/2/2018 07:31

David Buik's current source of futures;

[leedskier] 12/2/2018 06:52

Japan was closed today. So relatively quiet in Asia, which may explain the volatility in futures.

[leedskier] 12/2/2018 06:25

David Buik‏
@truemagic68

CORE SPREADS - opening calls update all futures contracts - FTSE +90, DAX +230, DOW +180 at 6.24am

[leedskier] 12/2/2018 06:00

David Buik‏
@truemagic68

CORE SPREADS - European suggested opening calls at 5.36am - FTSE +170 from Friday’s close, DAX +200 from Friday’s close and DOW futures +170 from Friday’s close

[raffles the gentleman thug] 11/2/2018 22:11

Thx - think it's rather good news actually. Perhaps I'm wrong but with LLOY commanding a near 30% premium to book, a "clean" RBS should be on at least a 10% premium. This means the current share price of 274p is currently discounting a drop to book of 250p a share versus actual book of 298p a share, which implies an incremental £5.6bn or $7.8bn of DoJ provisioning over and above the existing $3.7bn of provisions on balance sheet. In my opinion we are not gonna see anything close to that outcome which is why I'm happy to buying this all day long. Anyone in disagreement please state your case ...

[polar fox] 11/2/2018 21:44

Good stuff, Raffles. A timely coincidence with our posts.

All we can do, I suppose, is wait to see whether this reported intervention actually results in a quicker settlement, say, in Q2. It could help the share price in the S/T perhaps, as the market becomes more encouraged. From the Treasury's point of view, Rachel Brand's resignation couldn't have come at a more inconvenient time...

Those are my immediate thoughts.

[gcom2] 11/2/2018 21:36

Thanks Raffles. Significant news.

[leedskier] 11/2/2018 12:49

It is a strange thing about Hester. One might have thought that with his ruthless approach to banking, he was an ex public school boy who was sent away to school at a young age where he was frequently thrashed.

To the contrary he was the son of a University Professor and attended a comprehensive school.

But then come to think of it, Fred Goodwin was the son of an electrician.

So perhaps in the debate as to whether " it is nature or nurture" which produces these sociopaths, the psychologists may be right in thinking it is the way they are wired rather than the way they are raised. .

[maxk] 11/2/2018 09:49

Yep, shock horror..

[polar fox] 11/2/2018 08:05

The MoS has seen the full report. Plenty of hostile comments from readers.

"Shame of the RBS bullies: Explosive secret files show how bailed-out Royal Bank of Scotland bullied, mocked, threatened and ripped off clients... under watch of these three City titans."

[leedskier] 11/2/2018 07:21

Comment this morning behind the Telegraph paywall that some European diplomats are horrified by Barnier's open hostility towards Britain led me to examine the psyche of the man.

He was and it seems still is a Gaulist.

For those of my generation it is therefore easy to understand his view of the British.

It is well summarised in this article written in the independent last September.

[raffles the gentleman thug] 10/2/2018 11:44

Thx for that insight polar and I wish you a good weekend

[barmiddleton] 10/2/2018 10:32

That's great research CI, and many thanks for sharing it with us.

[chinese investor] 10/2/2018 10:30

Bit of a non story - Sunday Express hadn't done enough research !

[m1k3y1] 10/2/2018 10:26

Well found CI .
Thanks for the info

[chinese investor] 10/2/2018 10:11

Newspaper backs down over law firm claims after ISPO complaint

Signature Litigation acting for shareholders in the RBS rights issue litigation has secured a substantial correction from the Sunday Express to a story that implied it was in dispute with its clients, after making a complaint to the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO).

Signature Litigation said the newspaper had breached clause 1 of the IPSO code – on accuracy – in an article in the newspaper headlined “RBS shareholders tackle own lawyers”, published last November.

The online version’s headline was “RBS to lock horns with former lawyers in legal battle over £200m payout”.

The firm acts for a large number of claimants in the case and was retained in that capacity by the RBoS Shareholders Action Group, which acts as agent for the claimants.

Last March, the role performed by the group was delegated to Manx Capital Partners on a sole exclusive basis.

According to a resolution statement issued by IPSO – which ultimately did not need to adjudicate on the complaint – a dispute arose between the action group and Manx as to the terms and effect of that delegation, which resulted in litigation.
Signature was not a party to it.

It was settled with the action group agreeing not to appoint or instruct any other solicitors.

The Sunday Express article referred both to settlement damages paid to the claimants represented by Signature and also to the Manx dispute.

The firm said the newspaper was operating “on a fundamental misunderstanding of the matter upon which it was reporting” by conflating the two, which it argued resulted in a number of inaccuracies being published by the newspaper, including in the headlines.

The newspaper disagreed but offered Signature the opportunity to submit a letter for publication.

As a result, IPSO began an investigation, after which the newspaper offered to remove the original online article and replace it with an amended article, “the content of which had been agreed between the parties and which removed the inaccuracies that the complainant had complained of”.

The paper also removed the original online article from the other online platforms over which it had control, including its apps.

Signature said these steps resolved the matter to its satisfaction, meaning IPSO did not make a determination as to whether there had been any breach of the code.

A firm spokesman said: “The RBS rights issue litigation has in the past suffered from misreporting, which it has been important to correct in order that claimants and the public are not misinformed. We took action in this case to correct a number of inaccuracies and we were pleased to resolve the complaint having all of those removed.

“Signature Litigation has only ever acted for claimants, and not for the RBoS Shareholders Action Group Limited, which was the former agent in that case.

The new agent is Manx Capital Partners Limited, by whom we are instructed on behalf of the claimants.

“The action group company recently challenged Manx’s authority to manage the litigation, but this was resolved by the court in Manx’s favour.

“We are delighted with the result we achieved for the claimants in the RBS rights issue litigation, which was more than double that achieved for any other claimant group.

We are currently verifying all the shares and costs incurred in this case, in order to distribute funds to the claimants as soon as possible.”

[polar fox] 10/2/2018 09:33

Call me cynical if you like, Raffles, but I took the government's mooted sale with a big pinch of salt. Who the hell can know how the political/business/investment etc landscapes will look like come 2019?

To answer your specific question, I seem to recall that any sale is already conditional on the DoJ fine being settled/out of the way. I doubt any attempt will be made, therefore, until that condition is satisfied and then everything would become dependent on a whole myriad of circumstances, market conditions and such like.

You may not be aware of this, but Brand was looked upon as someone who might be friendlier towards foreign banks, in terms of the size of a fine. Who knows who will be nominated to succeed her and will that person have a less friendly attitude?

[raffles the gentleman thug] 10/2/2018 08:26

Polar do you consider that the U.K. government could press ahead with a controlled sale of shares whilst this issue remains unsettled.With a share price at 274p which is 14p or $2.3bn under book value, it's clear there is little confidence amongst investors at this time as to the likely scale of the eventual settlement.

[polar fox] 10/2/2018 07:31

A real shocker - Rachel Brand is leaving the DoJ to join Walmart as their top lawyer. The NYT broke the story yesterday and their report is below.

I posted last year, that any RBS settlement was unlikely before the upcoming Results or even in Q1. Brand's departure, possibly to be followed by Rod Rosenstein's firing/resignation, will significantly extend the timing of any RBS settlement, IMO. We should probably not now expect anything in the first half of this year. I don't think it will make much difference, other than to extend the uncertainty, pretty much on an open-ended basis.

We'll see, in the Results, how RBS choose to provision or not.

Anyway, here's the NYT article, plenty more on Google:

WASHINGTON — Rachel L. Brand, the No. 3 official at the Justice Department, plans to step down after nine months on the job as the country’s top law enforcement agency has been under attack by President Trump, according to two people briefed on her decision.

Ms. Brand’s profile had risen in part because she is next in the line of succession behind the deputy attorney general, Rod J. Rosenstein, who is overseeing the special counsel’s inquiry into Russian influence in the 2016 election. Mr. Trump, who has called the investigation a witch hunt, has considered firing Mr. Rosenstein.

Such a move could have put her in charge of the special counsel and, by extension, left her in the cross hairs of the president.

Ms. Brand, who became the associate attorney general in May, will become the global governance director at Walmart, the company’s top legal position, according to people briefed on her move. She has held politically appointed positions in the past three presidential administrations.

In her current job, she reports directly to Mr. Rosenstein and Jeff Sessions, the attorney general, who has recused himself from the Russia investigation.

Mr. Trump in recent weeks has escalated his criticism of the department for its handling of the inquiry and suggested that top law enforcement officials should face consequences for conduct he called “a disgrace.”

The release last week of a contentious Republican memo that accused the Justice Department and the F.B.I. of political bias raised new questions over whether Mr. Trump might seek to oust Mr. Rosenstein, who appointed the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III.

Ms. Brand now oversees a wide swath of the Justice Department, including the civil division, the civil rights division and the antitrust division. She helped lead the department’s effort to extend a law that authorizes the National Security Agency’s warrantless surveillance program.

In an op-ed in The Washington Post last year, Ms. Brand argued that the law “has been valuable and effective in protecting the nation’s security” and that law enforcement officers would be “at risk” without it. Congress voted to extend that law, Section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act, last month.

Last week, Ms. Brand hosted a summit meeting at the Justice Department on human trafficking. At that event, Mr. Sessions thanked her for her “strong leadership as our third in command at the department.”

But Ms. Brand has also become embroiled in the feud between the president and the nation’s law enforcement agencies. Reports that Mr. Trump had tried to fire Mr. Mueller and had considered firing Mr. Rosenstein raised questions of who would replace Mr. Rosenstein.

Ms. Brand’s assistant, Currie Gunn, has also left the department. Ms. Gunn could not be reached for comment.

unquote