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.
Hope your right , I've given up trying to predict what may or may not happen with RBS but have to agree dividends will definitely be on the cards at the first opportunity.
I am quietly confident that this year will see the last of the losses and that the sp will get a boost with each new set of results in 2018. I'd imagine that once the legal challenges are out of the way (RBS v Neil Mitchell nothwithstanding!), there won't be much prompting needed to restart the divs.
Aye, the very thing . I put it badly .Just meant not something that's been commented on for a long time . Kind of faded into the background as the SP dropped .As you say not a lot McEwan likely to do regarding the litigations and unless the government decide to just give the shares away , (nought to do with McEwan) , can't see the situation changing any time soon although there are some signs of improvement , .....I think , lol.
Ho hum we shall see. By the way the 25 lawyers are being payed for by you. Lol
You mean privatisation as in getting rid of the government stake and returning to divs? Hah! And I think Tilting'so case is going to take a long time!! I don't think we'll see that before 2020.
Good post ( posts ) . Thought you might have commented on the issue of privatisation . Personally think that's maybe a horse that's long bolted . Light at the end of the tunnel now , water under the bridge , etc , etc .
Loving the recent posts, this company really gets the passions flowing.
" Share price is falling so that says it all - it's nothing to do with us after all they are sophisticated apparently. " The share price over the last 6 months has risen steadily and considerably from about 170p in October; it certainly doesn’t feel like an sp that has ‘imminent collapse’ all over it, and it most definitely doesn’t ‘say it all’. In fact, if you were an attentive observer of the RBS sp you would know that actually it is really difficult to understand what the sp is saying! I suspect though that you are not an attentive observer, just a bystander who is (rightfully) outraged at the shoddy activities in which RBS had been engaged, but with a much less than complete understanding of the situation and a tendency towards conspiracy theory. " Don't you think that it is time that Mr Mckewan settled with all the outstanding issues ' legacy issues' repay the people and move on. The public would love him, the bank could then be privatised and instead of it being viewed as a point of weakness and a thorn in the governments side it would be viewed as a point of strength and trust so much so that all the advertising would be unnecessary and put all the fighting and denial behind it. Move on RBS " The legacy issues to which you refer are mostly court cases with regulators and governmental agencies; The processes are slow for precisely this reason. ‘Due process’ is by definition a set of deliberative steps to enable, as far as possible, and within the constraints of the law, a fair hearing of each side of an argument. I don’t think anything is being held up because of the whims of Ross McEwan. In fact, I suspect that he, like all of us, would like the legacy issues to be ended so that the bank can move on (and so that we can all move on!). I am also not sure that once the legacy stuff is resolved, that RBS will suddenly (re)acquire the trust of anyone.
Well, I am pretty disappointed that I’ve been genuinely interested enough to have pursued the conversation to such an underwhelming end. This case is a minor irritant to RBS in the scheme of things, but characteristic of some of the egregious things that RBS appears to have done for many years. Conveniently, Tilting has spread his thoughts out over three posts but I’ll try to respond to them all: " The case is a hearing and instead of 2 days went to 4. The judge could not decide and has taken it upstairs. The judge forgot to mention that he worked for Cerebus and that he shared the oppositions chambers etc etc. The point is that this case will open the flood gates. 25 lawyers on RBS side. They obviously think that this is important. " Firstly, you mean Cerberus, the investment company don’t you? It’s the little details that provide so much more clarity. Are you certain that the judge presiding over a case where Cerberus is historically implicated would have deliberately concealed the fact that he was an ex- employee, without fear of the conflict of interest being revealed and ending his judicial career? You’ll have to provide a reference for that. This case MIGHT open something IF it is found in Mitchell’s favour, but aside from that, I think a multi- billion pound organisation like RBS is probably armed with a pretty well staffed legal team as a matter of course. I would also imagine that any company would consider a legal action with a potential cost in excess of £100 million is important but you appear to be inferring something far more sinister.
Can't wait to read LennyMac's reply to that one.
Don't you think that it is time that Mr Mckewan settled with all the outstanding issues ' legacy issues' repay the people and move on. The public would love him, the bank could then be privatised and instead of it being viewed as a point of weakness and a thorn in the governments side it would be viewed as a point of strength and trust so much so that all the advertising would be unnecessary and put all the fighting and denial behind it. Move on RBS
Share price is falling so that says it all - it's nothing to do with us after all they are sophisticated apparently.
The case is a hearing and instead of 2 days went to 4. The judge could not decide and has taken it upstairs. The judge forgot to mention that he worked for Cerebus and that he shared the oppositions chambers etc etc. The point is that this case will open the flood gates. 25 lawyers on RBS side. They obviously think that this is important.
Thanks for the reference; what was the result? There doesn't seem to be much about the case after 2016. The company at the heart of the case, Torex, seems to have been a pretty shoddy operation (not that RBS should be excused for that), and an external report doesn't appear to have found anything untoward about the RBS restructuring unit in relation to it. On top of that, there seems to be no particular haste to decide on the case. Why are you so convinced this is going to cause RBS so much damage?
Neil Mitchell v rbs
Thanks for the link. The author writes like a drunken teenager; it is a painful read so I hope the guy is a subject matter. expert!
If after posting yet another set of dire annual accounts the share price has recovered again, how can anyone value this at £1.70?
Nobody seems to be reporting this except you. Are you sure you have the right bank? Can you provide a link to news on the case?
No !!!....How ?
Errrrrm, NO.
Can't argue that the bottom line is all important , especially these days , but don't your staff and business practice pretty much dictate what your bottom line will be ?
sorry, should have been 'reaction'
I couldn't work out whether Newchurch might have been being ironic when I first read his/ her post. Probably not, and the regency to the likely behaviour of the Lloyd's board indicated that he probably hadn't been on this board for very long or else he'd have been aware of the long, long experience we have of RBS' volatility. The jump was just one of many, many false dawns for this sp, to which regular posters are unfortunately innured, hence the underwhelming reaction.
Just last night it occurred to me that we'll never know how long these shoddy activities might have continued across the sector but for the crash in 2008. It is an absolute scandal.