Lloyds TSB/HBOS Merger. Is It Good For The Consumer?
Discussion
All the arguments seem to suggest it's good for confidence in the banking industry and therefore the whole UK Plc economy. But with the new group managing a third of the Uk mortgage market and substantial savings as well, I fear it will soon be abusing it's dominant position. Already there are talks of 40000 jobs being lost which surely is worrying for their employees especially in the current shrinking job market.
It does concern me that the monopolies regs were put into place for a reason, but good old Broon decided to 'waive' them for this merger.
Of course, the effect of HBOS going into administration would have been a disaster for the country, but I would be suprised if they weren't under an obligation to lose a number of branches to other banks by a certain date.
Of course, the effect of HBOS going into administration would have been a disaster for the country, but I would be suprised if they weren't under an obligation to lose a number of branches to other banks by a certain date.
Edited by Maxf on Thursday 18th September 14:29
I dont like that they've bypassed the competition commission people. I said it on the other thread, but as with Northern Rock there's good and bad in it.
I cant imagine it's going to bode well for those who are looking at redundancy and losing contracts to supply to HBOS. Unite are already kicking off about it as well
We're all going to be paying for that one for a while I think
I cant imagine it's going to bode well for those who are looking at redundancy and losing contracts to supply to HBOS. Unite are already kicking off about it as well
We're all going to be paying for that one for a while I think
In the short term it might be good because it prevents a high street bank going pop.
But if it had gone pop the good bits would have been bought and the bad bits thrown away, this won't happen now.
In the long term it is bad because it is a severe reduction in competition. But good because those redundancies are costs coming out of the banking system and it is we customers who pay those costs.
But if it had gone pop the good bits would have been bought and the bad bits thrown away, this won't happen now.
In the long term it is bad because it is a severe reduction in competition. But good because those redundancies are costs coming out of the banking system and it is we customers who pay those costs.
t from Unite was on breakfast TV this morning blaming... wait for it......the last Conservative Government for it all. 
glazbagun said:
2something said:
The unions can choose between some jobs remaining and no jobs remaining.
History shows they usually try and make the wrong decision.
I've never really had a problem with unions in principle, but experience does seem to show them as a bit suicidal/parasitic in nature.History shows they usually try and make the wrong decision.
Edited by Timmy35 on Thursday 18th September 14:48
Now here's a thing:-
"At a press conference held this afternoon at Dresdner Kleinwort's City offices, Sir Victor Blank, chairman of Lloyds TSB Group, said while a joining of the two brands had been looked at for many years, it was not until six weeks ago that the opportunity arose for a deal to be made.
Sir Victor said the deal was only able to be completed recently once market conditions changed, which led to the £12.2bn agreement as well as the fact that the takeover would not be contested by the Competition Commission.
He said: "It only happened as the government was willing to give their support in relation to competition issues. It was then on Monday night that Gordon Brown gave his support."
Andy Hornby, chief executive of HBoS, said a joining of the brands had "always been seen as a sensible idea" and was not a result of HBoS being "brought to its knees".
He said: "HBoS was still funding successfully but it did not want to take the risk in this market when share prices were so volatile.
"We were certainly prepared to continue successfully lending but what we were not prepared to do was to take that risk. It (the takeover) was absolutely the right time to become part of a bigger group with a much more diverse funding base."
Both Lloyds TSB and HBoS said shareholders had so far been supportive of the deal."
"At a press conference held this afternoon at Dresdner Kleinwort's City offices, Sir Victor Blank, chairman of Lloyds TSB Group, said while a joining of the two brands had been looked at for many years, it was not until six weeks ago that the opportunity arose for a deal to be made.
Sir Victor said the deal was only able to be completed recently once market conditions changed, which led to the £12.2bn agreement as well as the fact that the takeover would not be contested by the Competition Commission.
He said: "It only happened as the government was willing to give their support in relation to competition issues. It was then on Monday night that Gordon Brown gave his support."
Andy Hornby, chief executive of HBoS, said a joining of the brands had "always been seen as a sensible idea" and was not a result of HBoS being "brought to its knees".
He said: "HBoS was still funding successfully but it did not want to take the risk in this market when share prices were so volatile.
"We were certainly prepared to continue successfully lending but what we were not prepared to do was to take that risk. It (the takeover) was absolutely the right time to become part of a bigger group with a much more diverse funding base."
Both Lloyds TSB and HBoS said shareholders had so far been supportive of the deal."
Andy Hornby said:
"HBoS was still funding successfully but it did not want to take the risk in this market when share prices were so volatile.
"We were certainly prepared to continue successfully lending but what we were not prepared to do was to take that risk. It (the takeover) was absolutely the right time to become part of a bigger group with a much more diverse funding base."
Cobblers. "We were certainly prepared to continue successfully lending but what we were not prepared to do was to take that risk. It (the takeover) was absolutely the right time to become part of a bigger group with a much more diverse funding base."
Edited by Timmy35 on Thursday 18th September 14:51
Andy Hornby said:
a joining of the brands had "always been seen as a sensible idea" and was not a result of HBoS being "brought to its knees".
He said: "HBoS was still funding successfully but it did not want to take the risk in this market when share prices were so volatile.
"We were certainly prepared to continue successfully lending but what we were not prepared to do was to take that risk. It (the takeover) was absolutely the right time to become part of a bigger group with a much more diverse funding base."
Both Lloyds TSB and HBoS said shareholders had so far been supportive of the deal."
Belm, Chinny etcHe said: "HBoS was still funding successfully but it did not want to take the risk in this market when share prices were so volatile.
"We were certainly prepared to continue successfully lending but what we were not prepared to do was to take that risk. It (the takeover) was absolutely the right time to become part of a bigger group with a much more diverse funding base."
Both Lloyds TSB and HBoS said shareholders had so far been supportive of the deal."
emicen said:
Reduced competition vs. the Chinese buying it.
Lloyds have to be laughing though. Didnt they want to buy Northern Rock, a much smaller fish, and got blocked by the competition commission?
Yup, it's lovely for them, they have a massive great deposit base but not much of the mortgage market, HBoS have the reverse position. Lloyds have to be laughing though. Didnt they want to buy Northern Rock, a much smaller fish, and got blocked by the competition commission?
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff