Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 22nd November 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

RBS reports first ever loss



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 08 August 2008
ROYAL Bank of Scotland boss Sir Fred Goodwin insisted today that he remained the best man for the job despite unveiling the group's first loss in 40 years as a public company.
The NatWest and Direct Line owner reported pre-tax losses of £691 million for the first half of this year thanks mainly to a £5.9 billion credit crunch hit.

It is the second biggest banking loss in UK corporate history, and compares with £5 billio
n of profits the bank made this time last year.

Sir Fred, who asked shareholders for £12 billion in April to shore up the group's balance sheet, said the loss was a "chastening experience" that the board "regret very much".

But he insisted the management team, which includes chairman Sir Tom McKillop, was best placed to bring the bank through the "very difficult market conditions".

"We are focused here very much on doing what's right for our shareholders and to steer the business through a difficult time," Sir Fred said.

"We have steered it through good times and we are going to steer it through these times."

Banking analyst Ralph Silva said Sir Tom could be forced out as a result of the loss.

Mr Silva, from the Tower Group, told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: "I do feel there will be some victims.

"Maybe the chairman, Sir Tom McKillop, probably will be the one that will have to fall on his sword, and simply because the CEO, Sir Fred Goodwin... removing him would be too disruptive to the organisation at this time and it's just not responsible to do so.

"So if the investors want someone's head they will probably go after the chairman's."

Sir Fred said he was "comfortable" with the level of credit writedowns announced – around two-thirds of which apply to RBS and the remainder to Dutch Bank ABN Amro, which was bought by an RBS-led consortium last year for nearly £50 billion.

But he refused to be drawn on whether they would see the group through to the end of 2008.

On an statutory basis, RBS racked up pre-tax losses of £692 million.
But the bank focuses on the pro-forma measure of £691 million, which assumes ABN Amro was bought at the beginning of last year and is more useful to compare how the enlarged business had progressed.

On an underlying basis – discounting the effect of the huge credit market writedowns – RBS said it made profits of £5.14 billion compared with £5.32 billion the year before.

Sir Fred blamed the overall loss on the writedowns, which were signalled when the £12 billion rights issue was launched.

He said: "We are acutely aware that we drew heavily on our shareholders for financial support and we recognise that we must now deliver a level of performance that meets their expectations for the company and restores value to our shares. We are determined to do so, and this is our focus."

The group said its capital ratios – which measure how strong the balance sheet is – were ahead of target thanks to the fundraising exercise. The core Tier 1 ratio was 5.7%, compared with a 5% target, and he said he hoped to see it rise to 6% by the year end.

In a sign of the more difficult economic times, the group increased its bad debt charge by 58% to £1.48 billion, representing 0.46% of loans and advances.

Management was seeing "some increased strains" particularly among small business clients, it added, but has been offset by reductions in losses among personal unsecured debts thanks to a "conservative approach" to this sector in recent years.

RBS is also pursuing a sale of its insurance business, which includes Direct Line and Churchill.

Sir Fred said: "We are in discussions with people who are able to pay a sensible price."

He added: "(The deal) is only going to happen when we get an appropriate consideration for the business."



The full article contains 668 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 08 August 2008 10:57 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Royal Bank of Scotland
 
1

tomislav,

Home 08/08/2008 08:42:40
I withdrew 18,000 pounds from my RBS account so I am delighted if I helped them to sink, great, couldnt happen to a worse bank, oh and RBS, please keep sending the junk mail, the landfill is only half full
2

troonjambo,

Troon of course 08/08/2008 09:06:12
Why don't they just over-charge themselves the way they over-charge their customers? Just imagine the charges on that tidy sum! Honestly, does anyone have any sympathy for a bank in this country that loses money?
3

Jamiem,

08/08/2008 09:22:09
#1. You will actually have done your (small) bit to reduce their losses as they will no longer have had to pay you interest on the deposit, thus reducing their expenses. The withdrawal of cash has no impact on the profit figures, it is purely a balance sheet item and as they just got £12bn of cash from a rights issue I don't think your £18k will be missed.
4

The Strategist,

08/08/2008 09:33:52
Everytime I watch a Formula One race on TV and see again the huge number of RBS hoardings around the circuit I am reminded that RBS support for Scottish motor sport is as near as darn it zero which summarises rather neatly its entire attitude to being Scottish.

We need a new bank.
5

Numptie,

Edinburgh 08/08/2008 09:45:30
What this really means is that RBS made a profit of £5.14 billion compared to a profit of £5.32 billion the year before, not bad in a bad market. The fact that they chose to write down £5.9 billion is just a guess on future losses, not their actual losses.
6

chasbaba,

london 08/08/2008 09:46:10
RBS is one the worlds biggest banks, and number 33 biggest company in the world. It has been around since 1727 and is not about to disappear down the chute because of a few small minded Scottish moaners. It pays full and large taxes which we all directly or indirectly benefit from one way or another. The banks invest heavily in British Business and basically are one large componentin in the level of our GDP. They make mistakes but hey stop bashing the banks.
7

Numptie,

Edinburgh 08/08/2008 09:48:55
PS. I assume that RBS can write off their £692m loss against future profits and will they pay any tax on the £5.14 billion they actually made in profits. I wish I could say I was going to lose money next year and then write that loss off against my wages for this year.
8

troonjambo,

Troon of course 08/08/2008 09:52:25
Jamien,

I'm certainly no banking expert but if not paying a customer interest on an account balance would save RBS money then surely that might suggest that the way they are conducting their business is responsible for the fact that they are losing money. Maybe they should try making more money from the way they invest the customers' balances that they give back in interest. Just a thought. I still don't think many people will have any sympathy for them. As other posters have already commented these figures are all relative and compared to profits made over the years I hardly think those employed in the upper echelons of the banking community are shaking in their collective boots at the current state of the banking industry.
9

FC Barcelona,

08/08/2008 09:52:26
#1 the paltry figure you mention won't even register on RBS radar, #6 too true with all the moaners, if RBS which is the biggest business in scotland is in trouble the whole economy of scotland is up the creek without a paddle
10

troonjambo,

Troon 08/08/2008 09:54:47
Ooops -

should have read

.... more money from the way they invest the customers' balances THAN they give back .....
11

Mark_fi_Morningside,

Edinburgh 08/08/2008 09:55:35
Fred (after Ozymandias)

I met a traveller from a Scottish land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand by Gogar. Near them on the sand,
Half sunk, a shatter'd visage lies, whose frown
And spectacles and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamp'd on these lifeless things,
The hand that mock'd them and the heart that fed.
And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Fred the Shred, king of fools:
Look on my deals, ye Mighty, and despair!"
Nothing beside remains: round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,
The lone and level sands stretch far away (well, at least as far as the Gyle shopping centre)
12

John south of Soutra,

08/08/2008 09:57:42
Will the people who received huge bonuses in previous years based on deals which are now being written off, be handing them back.
Questions must be asked of the management of all banks who allowed their staff to get them into this mess by taking on high risk customers.
It's like the Barings bank scenario, the board turned a blind eye to what Nick Leeson was doing when he was making vast profits for them but when things go pearshaped they need a fall guy, and the fall guys here will be the staff that are paid off not the directors and senior management
13

W Smith,

Middle East 08/08/2008 10:11:04
I'm with #6 and #9 on this one.

1) Gordon Brown has spent hundreds of billions of pounds on quangos - part of his 'bonfire' apparently.

How many jobs has Brown brought to Scotland?

2) Alex Salmond has spent most of his time prattling on and on about Trident while one of his councillors gets weapons training in Pakistan.

How many jobs has Salmond brought to Scotland?

Out of the three of them, Salmond, Brown and Fred Godwin I think I would still keep Fred and get rid of the other 2 politically correct numpties.

My money is on RBS to recover.

BTW
Anyone who didn't by their shares recently at £1.70-ish should give themselves a slap.

Whats more of a risk?

Shares in RBS or a packet of fags for double the price?
14

W Smith,

Middle East 08/08/2008 10:25:20
As companies struggle to make profits the Treasury will suffer a short-fall in corporation tax revenue.

Mr Brown will be looking out for more cash to make up for this deficit.

Guess who's going to have to pay more and more tax to help meet Gordy's budget?

Look in the mirror!
15

akjem,

dundee 08/08/2008 10:47:27
The financial 'industry' has converted money ( a means of exchange ) into a commodity (you can buy it). It was only a matter of time before the inevitable happened. The banks are not solely responsible, there are many players in the money-lending game.

I am reminded of the time, many years ago, when, as a newly qualified teacher, I visited my old B of S manager asking for a loan ( to cover train fare) to finance my summer holiday trip to London. He asked me how I intended to repay the bank. I told him I had a job on a building site lined up( which I had) and that I had a teaching job lined up at the end of the summer ( which I also had ). He just laughed, said no and wished me all the best.
16

Mcsnagpile,

08/08/2008 10:51:01
Once upon a time in a snug deep part of a black forest, there were jewellers shops. They had large safe storage vaults, therefore began to store peoples wealth. They gave out paper notes instead of taking bags of gold out of the vaults. This is where everything went pear shaped. The jewellers started to give out notes of credit to values worth more than they had in the vaults.
Hey, why bother about making jewellery?? Lets get into the printing business. Banks are a service that prints paper notes of credit, (or just inputs digits to a computer) to values based on nothing but ideas of worth. There is no gold or silver standard. If you stop throwing the balls in the air everything falls down. So bank profit and Loss is really purely hypothetical.
They cannae even make a decent necklace.
17

The Strategist,

08/08/2008 10:51:28
#9

Utter krap... RBS is irrelevant as far as the real Scottish economy is concerned. It invests very little here but on the other hand has - along with its compatriots - been complicit in the huge increase in house prices by over lending.

It's basically done all the wrong things for the economy whilst ensuring its own pocket has been well lined. It's now getting its comeuppance although I'm quite sure this will make little difference to its behaviour.

We need a new bank.


18

Rosscobhoy,

08/08/2008 10:55:45
#5 Has it spot on. RBS have made a massive profit in real terms. The "Credit Crunch" is a sham.
19

Indy Rep Kid...,

08/08/2008 10:57:40
#17

"RBS is irrelevant as far as the real Scottish economy is concerned"

Apart from the thousands and thousands of staff it employs in Scotland (and the UK)....???

Apart from the massive amount of tax it pays each year - billions, not millions.......???

When you say 'we need a new bank', what exactly do you mean?
20

Eric08,

08/08/2008 11:03:52
No idea why everyone bleats on about how bad UK banks are. Banks abroad wouldn't give you free cash cards and free cheque services. They also wouldn't give 5% on savings etc. You'd be lucky to get 0.2%. Oh and don't forget they would also charge you for the privilege of having a bank account and to take money out the cash machine each time. We are spoiled in the UK.
21

Angus Ogg,

08/08/2008 11:17:54
#3 Jamiem.

I don't think you understand the rules about banking. There are strict controls over liquidity and reserves. You may not think that #1's withdrawal has any impact, but even on its own it does. Because of the liquidity rules, more effect than you might appreciate.

I withdrew forty six thousand pounds from RBS a short while ago in protest at how they treated one of our tenants who was trying to start a new business.

Jamiem, if there are others like #1 Tomislav, and myself, withdrawing their funds form RBS, and I am fairly certain there are, then within 12 months RBS WILL have to return for ANOTHER 12 billion rights issue. Methinks that as their share price recently was in meltdown, and the likes of HBoS only managed a miniscule 8% uptake of their rights issue, when it comes for the banks to ask for more in second round of rights need, I suspect the underwriters will run a mile.

Reminds me a bit of Oliver Twist. Please Sir can I have some more.

This time it isn't the hapless bank customer at the manager's office asking for an overdraft, but the bank themselves at their lender's office. Next time the answer will be a resounding NO for the banks.

Poetically ironic.
22

Jamiem,

08/08/2008 12:04:26
#21 I know all about the controls, it's a major part of my job. And I know that one withdrawal of £18k - and even another withdrawal of £46k - will have gone entirely unnoticed.

The banks are dealing in billions and the Central Banks are doing all they can to help them manage those billions for liquidity purposes. You are overinflating your importance here, I'm afraid.
23

The Strategist,

08/08/2008 13:14:18
#19

The shire and city councils employ more people than RBS.. This is a "so what" argument.

The tax RBS pays goes to the Treasury and doesn't stay in Scotland. Be nice if it did.

New bank? We need a regional type bank similar to those in Germany and Scandinavia. The German ones are owned by the state and work in collaboration with politicians and business to grow local economies/companies etc.. Scandinavian banks also work in collaboration with their Govts and their industry..

Being regionally focussed is important.. RBS doesn't have its eye on Scotland but is focussed much more internationally.... It has invested in the Bank of China, is buying ABN and so on and so forth..
24

Salem,

08/08/2008 13:59:56
#17 has it right!

The name the Royal Bank of SCOTLAND is a misnomer it is nothing more than a brand name.

Look at where the losses have occurred.

RBS like it’s English counterpart Barclays bragged in their advertising they were out to conquer the world of banking.

RBS investments in Scotland are insignificant because of the management’s burning desire to be global players.

What has happened is what happens when you get too big for your boots and blinded by arrogance.

Like Sir Fred Goodwin insisting he is still the best man for the job.

In Japan he would have already committed hara- kiri if he had one iota of honor!

Scotland needs a SCOTTISH bank geared to the needs of the Scottish economy and people!
25

Salem,

08/08/2008 14:26:15
The Times of London reports:

Sir Fred Goodwin, the bank's chief executive, insisted that the first-half results demonstrated "progress in a number of important areas. It is all the more unsatisfactory, therefore, that they record a loss as a result of our credit market write downs," he said.

"We are determined to ensure that the inherent strengths of the group's diverse business model are not obscured in this way again."

He said that the unprecedented turbulence in financial markets had been a chastening experience. "Reporting a pre-tax loss ... is something I and my colleagues regret very much," Sir Fred said.

RBS had previously warned the market of the size of its write downs when it announced its £12 billion rights issue earlier this year. The record cash call, just months after Sir Fred had assured the market that the bank had enough capital, resulted in calls for his resignation. He said today that he was aware that investors now expected him to return value to the company's shares.

How many times have we heard these kind of lies before? Everything is just fine, no problems. Then a few days’ later disaster strikes.

The arrogant Goodwin should be fired and given a multi £million handshake!
26

Dissector,

Stirling 08/08/2008 14:34:22
I just wonder if Sir Fred would enjoy being "shredded" in the same way that he has applied the process to his acquisitions or to the bank's customers experiencing difficulty. Being "chastened" is a very relative term if you're paid £2M every year - moi a cynic - perhaps.
27

Salem,

08/08/2008 14:37:17
It continues to amaze me how guys like Sir Fred get away with it?
28

Jamiem,

08/08/2008 16:02:54
RBS hasn't really lost money as such (excepting what was paid for ABN Amro). The losses being reported are accounting losses, because they are taking write downs on risky investments for prudence reasons. It is very possible that many of those losses will never be realised in monetary terms and the investments in question will recover their value before maturity so that the losses reverse in time.
29

Angus Ogg,

08/08/2008 16:33:03
#22 I defer to your knowledge being far better than mine, and that as you say, as you modestly offer your opinion, both I, and #1 above are totally unimportant to the Royal Bank of Scotland.

But tell me this, what if several hundred people are like me, and believe that the Royal Bank of Scotland has become arrogant and treat it's customers with disrespect? As a result they then decide to take their money out?

Perhaps that arrogance and contempt typified by your posts to me and number #1, may end up with your share price collapsing? Oh sorry, seems to me like it already did. As for your post at #29. Sorry you are talking smoke and mirrors, and there is something that you may be a banking expert in, but sadly not a customer expert, which is a huge risk for the Royal Bank of Scotland. Confidence. When a bank loses that, it is astronomically difficult to get it back. If you doubt this, perhaps you should go buy some shares in Northern Rock. I hear they are almost as good a buy as the Royal Bank of Scotland.
30

Salem,

08/08/2008 16:43:34
# 29
You sound like a bank employee!

The reality is in the current situation banks around the world have been drip-feeding their forecast losses to avoid panic as suggested by # 30 Angus Ogg.

In recent months not one single bank or investment bank has proved to have over stated write-downs, on the contrary the experience has been there’s always more bad news to come.

It’s not what they are telling us – it’s what they’re not telling us that have many folks worried.

Prudence you say!

Prudence is not in the vocabulary of banks like RBS, more like reckless and irresponsible lending practices and investments driven by greed like buying dead beat sub-prime mortgage debt.
31

Salem,

08/08/2008 18:05:32
# 32 a good question!

Why is RBS in it present precarious state backing an 11 billion deal for a German ball bearing company to buy the Continental a tire company.

I'll tell you why, it's because RBS wants to play with the big boys in investment banking.

Should they not be drawing their horns in and fixing the mess they have on their hands now.

32

Salem,

08/08/2008 18:57:47
Here’s an extract from an article in the Scotsman:

Published Date: 20 April 2008

By Nathalie Thomas and William Lyons

After bullishly defending Royal Bank's capital position a few months ago, Goodwin faces an embarrassing U-turn and a fight to save his job, write Nathalie Thomas and William Lyons.

THERE was a note of arrogance in Sir Fred Goodwin's voice when, in February, he casually cast aside analysts' calculations that the Royal Bank of Scotland would have to launch a £12.5bn rights issue.

As if he was speaking to a gathering of unruly school children, Goodwin accused some of the City's most respected scribblers of "inventing" figures that suggested the bank would have to go cap in hand to shareholders to raise extra cash that would bolster its flagging capital reserves.

"The capital ratios are there. If you want to go and make up your own, feel free... It becomes a bit difficult to have a reasonable and rational conversation when people invent their own ratios," he said defiantly, doing nothing to dampen his reputation in the City as a "megalomaniac".

Sir Fred could be about to get his comeuppance.

Sounds like a good time to check the space under your mattress!
33

Jambo 3,

EDINBURGH 08/08/2008 19:55:55
Good old Sir Fred. Can't you just see the headlines later this year " Sir Fred gets £3m bonus for loosing 691m of the RBS money" !!!
34

St. Andrews,

St Andrews 08/08/2008 21:49:59
You are all a bunch of muppets. Fact. Please grow up and stop submitting comments which no one reads to stories which no one reads in a newspaper which people stopped reading 10 years ago (this is the first time I've been bored enough in ten years to look up this website).

RBS employs 20,000 people in Scotland. It is the largest corporate tax payer in the UK and spends millions of pounds every year supporting good causes and communities in Scotland. It contributes more to Scottish economic growth than any other company through employment, purchasing, credit to individuals, support for small and medium-sized businesses and tax. The company also puts Scotland's name in every corner of the globe.`

Go try buy a house next week without a bank. Good luck.

You are all pathetic. We should stop this constant Scottish attitude which is determined to drag down anyone or anything Scottish which succeeds. If its not Sean Connery, Andy Murray or someone else you're having a go at, its the only decent international company we've got. Folks, eyes open wide awake, its a tough old world out there and we need every competitive advantage we've got to survive. Get with the project or get out. All of you have a responsibility to play your part in helping Scotland get on in this world.

You sit their at home, with a chip on your shoulder resulting from a charge on your bank account because you can't manage your finances enough to stay in your overdraft.

Get a grip. Finally, instead of trying to pick pedantic holes in my arguments why don't you walk away from your computer and think about your own place in this world.
35

Angus Ogg,

08/08/2008 22:43:04
St Andrews,

I think I watched you on tv. Real Name Victor Meldrew.

So everyone but you are a "bunch of muppets".

Nice way to try a rational debate.

I agree with part of the point you are trying to make, and it is a pretty important point about envy and tartan-chip-on-shoulder syndrome, but you've made that much of a clock up of it, that I can only assume you work for a bank or similar organisation.

Also, for your information, I gave up on banks over ten years ago, and yes, it most certainly is possible to buy a house without a bank. Not only is it possible, but highly desireable and a worthy aim. You dont get scr3wed for 25 years into paying 500,000 back when you only borrowed 200,000 in the first place.

Now away and calm yourself down Vic, cos your head will impode if you don't cool off a bit.
36

The Genuine Mario Antoinette,

09/08/2008 03:33:34
Well , individuals taking money out the bank will affect them albeit in a very small way. Retail Banking is the "Oil" driving the INvestment banking side.

In an earlier job I was someone partially responsible for giving RBS and others overdrafts believe it or not, I'm curious to know what the rules are now. 3 years ago we didnt even blink if they asked for less than a Billion.

As for mortgages , its only common sense but if you have to have one , pay the bloody thing off as soon as you can instead of financing this nonsense. Bottom line , the banking world still operates via the trust of their customers.. perhaps apathy?stupidity are better words now.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Should banks be paying for staff Christmas parties as their customers suffer?
Yes, staff deserve to be rewarded for their year’s hard work
It’s okay making a contribution, but not £1 million
No, staff should have to pay for their own parties

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.