George Frangeskides, Chairman at ALBA, explains why the Pilbara Lithium option ‘was too good to miss’. Watch the video here.
London South East prides itself on its community spirit, and in order to keep the chat section problem free, we ask all members to follow these simple rules. In these rules, we refer to ourselves as "we", "us", "our". The user of the website is referred to as "you" and "your".
By posting on our share chat boards you are agreeing to the following:
The IP address of all posts is recorded to aid in enforcing these conditions. As a user you agree to any information you have entered being stored in a database. You agree that we have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic or board at any time should we see fit. You agree that we have the right to remove any post without notice. You agree that we have the right to suspend your account without notice.
Please note some users may not behave properly and may post content that is misleading, untrue or offensive.
It is not possible for us to fully monitor all content all of the time but where we have actually received notice of any content that is potentially misleading, untrue, offensive, unlawful, infringes third party rights or is potentially in breach of these terms and conditions, then we will review such content, decide whether to remove it from this website and act accordingly.
Premium Members are members that have a premium subscription with London South East. You can subscribe here.
London South East does not endorse such members, and posts should not be construed as advice and represent the opinions of the authors, not those of London South East Ltd, or its affiliates.
"hunt means to pursue and kill"
================================
No it doesn't. A 'manhunt' is rarely intended to kill the person being sought unless you are being pursued by the American military...or in the UK you are a Brazilian tourist!!
Spindler, I realise whistleblowing is a tough one for any company. On the one hand there is genuine fraud or wrong doing being exposed and on the other hand there are very disruptive elements in an organisation with more nefarious objectives, e.g someone trying to falsely implicate an innocent person to get them fired. I have noticed strong words like "hunt down" being used in Staleys case, hunt means to pursue and kill. Did Staley really HUNT the whistleblower down and throw the kitchen sink in order to find the persons or was Staley trying to identity him/her being over zealous in his endeavour. The fact is its easy for the media to but a lot of spin on such events and the public don't hear the full facts because there is company info identities to protect.
Spindler, I realise whistleblowing is a tough one for any company. On the one hand there is genuine fraud or wrong doing being exposed and on the other hand there are very disruptive elements in an organisation with more nefarious objectives, e.g someone trying to falsely implicate an innocent person to get them fired. I have noticed strong words like "hunt down" being used in Staleys case, hunt means to pursue and kill. Did Staley really HUNT the whistleblower down and throw the kitchen sink in order to find the persons or was Staley trying to identity him/her being over zealous in his endeavour. The fact is its easy for the media to but a lot of spin on such events and the public don't hear the full facts because there is company info identities to protect.
Kogg as someone else pointed out Staley ignored the Whistlebowers points and threw the kitchen sink at finding the whistleblower , does that sound like someone who is going to have a reasonable conversation or out to destroy someone ? Seems like a fox walking back towards the hounds to have a conversation with the Huntmaster of the merits of fox hunting.....
Surly a person under any form of scrutiny is the last person within the organisation who should be able to have any influence on that process at all. How that is enacted is a difficult question, but as with remuneration committees they should be kept ver much at arms length. (Unfortunately they aren't always!).
"If it turns out Staley is innocent, that'll be another good CEO forced to resign from Barclays....If it turns out there is evidence against Staley then this abrupt step down was the best to avoid scandal for the bank."
============================================================
It is a matter of trust & honesty (fairly important for bankers....stop laughing!!!).
Mr Staley apparently told the BOD his 'relationship' with Epstein was purely business, the FCA report the BOD have seen a sneak preview of, 'apparently' suggests they have reached a different conclusion (or there are questions to answer).
"Disagree, because a good COE should know who and why there is someone whistleblowing from within the company, if someone is not happy the CEO is the one who can put things right. Its what a ceo does with the whistleblower when he finds them that matters."
================================================
Surely it is how the CEO deals with the accusations of the whistleblower, not who they are, that is important? If the accusations are correct they need to be dealt with, if they are false then they need to be refuted.
I don't know if the identity of whisleblowers is protected by law or by the rules of the company....there isn't much point of having an anonymous whisleblower policy if they are then hunted down by the CEO!!
" But really he should have gone over his hunt for the whistleblower."
Disagree, because a good COE should know who and why there is someone whistleblowing from within the company, if someone is not happy the CEO is the one who can put things right. Its what a ceo does with the whistleblower when he finds them that matters.
If it turns out Staley is innocent, that'll be another good CEO forced to resign from Barclays. Personally speaking I think Bob Diamond was a excellent COE that was used as a scapegoat by the government and banking regulator of the day to hide their own failings, all the way back in 2008. If it turns out there is evidence against Staley then this abrupt step down was the best to avoid scandal for the bank.
Staley’s departure is a storm in a teacup. All CEOs have to go eventually. There appears to be no collateral damage to Barclays. The succession plan has obviously been in place for some time and there is nothing to suggest Barclays won’t continue on its current course.
I've been pondering Barclays a lot of late. Something jumps out at me and has for some time. Of all my credit cards it's the only one with no balance transfer offers and I am squeaky clean. I hear a lot people have had their limits reduced which hasn;t happened to me as yet. I've been thinking they are really battening down the hatches on risk which may well be very sensible or there is a reason they seem to be acting differently. Banks make money out of this kind of thing and they used to do all kinds of deals now nada.... Prudence or something else ?
" But really he should have gone over his hunt for the whistleblower."
Absolutely agree with that, he went right off the deep end over that ! That in itself was enough !
I'm guessing he didn't anticipate this news breaking, hence the departure date being brought forward.
Thing that bothers me about Staley's step down is the abruptness of it. Even though Staley had announced his departure awhile ago, his departure this morning was an unplanned - why wasn't his departure date announced in advance?
12 months notice pay plus pension and relocation to the US !
Unbelievable
To be frank, many of the bigger risks for Barclay's have been self inflicted and those skeletons in the cupboard. I don't know, but this could lead to a longer term gain, but I did wonder why a couple of directors sold shares last week.
I expect the market to gradually wake up to the fact that Barclays now has a better CEO.
"Is Venkat the one and the same who was a fine spinner for India!
=============================================================
I wish that were true.
Mr C.S. Venkatakrishnan (known as Venkat)
Another yank yanks a few million off the UK.
Is Venkat the one and the same who was a fine spinner for India!
I expect the remuneration is to keep Mr Staley 'happy' - for he will know where he has buried all the bodies - and Mr Venkat was holding all the cards in his pay negotiation, 'probably' given a blank cheque!
Wipipedia: "In February 2020, the FCA announced an investigation into whether Staley was "fit and proper" to lead Barclays, due to concerns over his previous disclosures of his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. Staley told Bloomberg TV that "The investigation is actually focused on transparency, and whether I was transparent and open with the bank and with the board with respect to my relationship with Jeffrey Epstein." Staley told colleagues that he expects to leave Barclays by the end of 2021."
Not as shocked as to see the payoff or the new individuals pay package. How do they justify such packages? I wouldn't complain but it just seems a bit excessive.
A bit of a surprise. But really he should have gone over his hunt for the whistleblower. But not good for BARC.
CS Venkatakrishnan take CEO at Barclays as Staley steps down - a bit shocked at the news.
Barclays is taking on buy now/pay later fintechs such as Klarna that have expanded rapidly in the U.K. by offering short-term, interest-free installment loans to consumers. And Amazon is indirectly tied to the effort.
Barclays is reportedly working on a partnership with Amazon to offer interest-bearing installment loans for the e-commerce giant’s U.K. customers. Barclays has provided interest-free installment loans for iPhones with Apple U.K. since 2019.
Barclays has appointed Antony Stephen, former head of Amazon Payments Europe, as CEO of Barclays Partner Finance, which provides U.K. consumers with point-of-sale financing and installment loans for higher-value purchases such as home improvements and furniture.