SBP:NAMA plan to protect large developers from collapse.

[Marlowe]

The leading story in today's SBP states:

Quote: ''The country's largest property developers will be protected from collapse by the proposed National Asset Management agency.
Under advanced plans being drawn up by the department of Finance NAMA will agree not to force up to 20 of the country's top developers into liquidation''.

I have long held the view that the setting up of NAMA is going to end up as an unmitigated disaster for this country.How on earth are they going to prevent the top developers from going bust without exposing the taxpayers to a level of dept which we will simply be unable to pay.

Quote: ''Plans are being drawn up to ensure that bad loans taken on by NAMA will be worked out over a period of at least 10 years and that so called 'firesale' of landbanks at knockdown prices will be avoided as officials fear that this would crystallise taxpayers losses''.


One should bear in mind that the country's top 20 developers are responsible for a huge proportion of the toxic debt.I was going to say that the govt do not know what they are doing here.On the contrary it now seems pretty obvious that as far as a bailout is concerned they know exactly what they are doing.

But it will lead this country to bankruptcy.Quite simply this farce must be stopped now.

http://www.sbpost.ie/post/pages/p/story.aspx-qqqt=NEWS-qqqs=news-qqqid=41827-qqqx=1.as



Link will be available at 6:30.

 

[Marlowe]

A source went on to say : ''They are against the appointment of receivers and liquidators.''

If this is allowed to drag on for 10 years it will delay any real possibility of recovery.

 

[cactusflower]

I think that taxpayers shouldn't pay for these losses. Both the Bank Guarantee and the purchase of Anglo Irish were disasters.

If the damn thing(Nama) is formed, the lands should be sorted into dead loss (split it up and give it out for use as allotments) and lands with some potential - lands with future development use would be better nursed along. This doesn't mean keeping developers afloat - the lands could be held in public ownership.

Those lands could be leased for allotments too.

 

[wombat]

Quote: ''Plans are being drawn up to ensure that bad loans taken on by NAMA will be worked out over a period of at least 10 years and that so called 'firesale' of landbanks at knockdown prices will be avoided as officials fear that this would crystallise taxpayers losses''.

The longer this goes on, the more I agree with the position of the Republican congressmen who voted against Bush's 1st bank bailout. These people made huge profits during the property bubble and now want to be protected from the burst - it is a distortion of capitalism, nobody is too big to fail.

 

[bormotello]

But it will lead this country to bankruptcy.Quite simply this farce must be stopped now.

It is impossible
Politicians in this country are independent from voters

 

[McDave]

The leading story in today's SBP states:
Quote: ''Plans are being drawn up to ensure that bad loans taken on by NAMA will be worked out over a period of at least 10 years and that so called 'firesale' of landbanks at knockdown prices will be avoided as officials fear that this would crystallise taxpayers losses''.

Em, at what point did developers' and bankers' losses become taxpayers' "losses"?

The more light this NAMA thing is exposed to, the more it stinks.

 

[seabhcan]

Em, at what point did developers and bankers losses become "taxpayers' losses"?

The more light this NAMA thing is exposed to, the more it stinks.

When NAMA buys the developers's loans from the banks, and the developers go bust, that will result in a loss to the taxpayer.

I fear that if NAMA strings out the developers over 10 years, it will end up with the developers paying their other debts to other lenders by selling capital (plant, land, machinery, etc) and then an assetless developer company going bust with a total loss to the taxpayer.

If we force them out of business now at least we'd own their assets and could sell them ourselves over 10 years. maybe it would have been better to nationalise the developers instead of the banks?

 

[mackthenack]

The leading story in today's SBP states:

Quote: ''The country's largest property developers will be protected from collapse by the proposed National Asset Management agency.
Under advanced plans being drawn up by the department of Finance NAMA will agree not to force up to 20 of the country's top developers into liquidation''.

I have long held the view that the setting up of NAMA is going to end up as an unmitigated disaster for this country.How on earth are they going to prevent the top developers from going bust without exposing the taxpayers to a level of dept which we will simply be unable to pay.

Quote: ''Plans are being drawn up to ensure that bad loans taken on by NAMA will be worked out over a period of at least 10 years and that so called 'firesale' of landbanks at knockdown prices will be avoided as officials fear that this would crystallise taxpayers losses''.


One should bear in mind that the country's top 20 developers are responsible for a huge proportion of the toxic debt.I was going to say that the govt do not know what they are doing here.On the contrary it now seems pretty obvious that as far as a bailout is concerned they know exactly what they are doing.

But it will lead this country to bankruptcy.Quite simply this farce must be stopped now.


Link will be available at 6:30.

amazing that a lead story can be made out of this. surely the purpose of nama was obvious to anybody with a set of eyes and a memory from the very beginning!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[DCon]

FF looking after their own. No news here really.

 

[goosebump]

Both the Bank Guarantee and the purchase of Anglo Irish were disasters.

Dare we ask why?

If the damn thing(Nama) is formed, the lands should be sorted into dead loss (split it up and give it out for use as allotments) and lands with some potential - lands with future development use would be better nursed along. This doesn't mean keeping developers afloat - the lands could be held in public ownership.

Those lands could be leased for allotments too.

You do realise that banks also have depositors, don't you?

If we write off all the loans and turn the land banks into allotments, how to you propose we meet deposit demand?

 

[geri]

Here's a reality check for FF - I have just spent the last week on the phone to the local authority trying to arrange a Housing Adaptation Grant for my 87 yr old granny. She's being discharged from hospital tomorrow due to bed shortages and urgently needs handrails, adapted shower, toilet, etc., if she is to continue to live independently - this is the purpose of the grant. Although this grant scheme is still in place, the govt haven't been able to hand over the funds for it to local authorities yet this year - so we are now making panicked arrangements about my granny's care. She only has her pension and our family have been hit hard by this downturn - we don't have access to the money needed for this.

My point -why should the vulnerable be left to suffer while the developers are getting the soft landing?

I am so sickened by this, even moreso because there is nothing I can do.

 

[goosebump]

My point -why should the vulnerable be left to suffer while the developers are getting the soft landing?

Please explain how a different course of action re. the banking system will result in your Granny get a grant to renovate her house.

 

[goosebump]

When NAMA buys the developers's loans from the banks, and the developers go bust, that will result in a loss to the taxpayer.

I fear that if NAMA strings out the developers over 10 years, it will end up with the developers paying their other debts to other lenders by selling capital (plant, land, machinery, etc) and then an assetless developer company going bust with a total loss to the taxpayer.

If we force them out of business now at least we'd own their assets and could sell them ourselves over 10 years. maybe it would have been better to nationalise the developers instead of the banks?

Except that the developers owe money to lots of different banks. Hence, forcing them into liquidation brings lots of other banks into the problem.

 

[Question R24U]

Would it be legally possible for Fine Gael to not honour NAMA obligations when they get into power?

 

[blucey]

Whatever happened about pursiign them to the gates of hell?

 

[Question R24U]

Whatever happened about pursiign them to the gates of hell?

Given that private banks have shown 'substantial discounting and forebearance' in the past to preferred customers eg GPA investors including £200k writeoff in 1993 for Dr. Fitzgerald, this was never a runner. Taxpayers will pick up the tab again.

 

[cactusflower]

Dare we ask why?



You do realise that banks also have depositors, don't you?

If we write off all the loans and turn the land banks into allotments, how to you propose we meet deposit demand?

Firstly, I don't think the loans should be written off - I disagree fundamentally with the Banks Guarantee, the nationalisation of Anglo Irish and the proposed NAMA.

The point I was making is that a fire sale of assets would be the worst possible way of managing them, in the event that Nama goes ahead.
The Germans are setting up a bank with a 20 year time frame.

If banks are depending on proceeds of these edge of town fields and half built estates for their liquidity, they would be finished anyway. At the moment they are relying on the Guarantee and the ECB support of Government to keep the system afloat.

I'm not sure what you mean by "deposit demand".

 

[Decadance]

Would it be legally possible for Fine Gael to not honour NAMA obligations when they get into power?

There are legal methods to prevent it happening in the first place - hopefully FG and Lab will be able to work them out.

 

[cactusflower]

Well played Mr. Lenihan.
I was hoping for this a month ago;


"Originally Posted by DaveM
Eamonn Gilmore and Joan Burton ..." NAMA is some kind of developer bailout."

I was sort of hoping it might be, although keeping developers solvent is probably politically impossible.

Originally Posted by marmurr1916;
The intention is that NAMA will go after those who owe money far more vigourously than the current banks would

The danger is that developers will be spooked into unloading properties before NAMA gets its hands on them and pursues its plan of waiting for the next bubble.

The Irish property crash hasn't started yet. It starts the day the interest on loans isn't rolled over. And then bang.
NAMA is still the best stab at a solution but it doesn't really matter what we do. Our economy can't handle it.
We're doomed."

Chin up.

There is no reason why the tax payer should pay for the bad debts of property speculators. That is what bondholders are for.

 

[Marlowe]

There are legal methods to prevent it happening in the first place - hopefully FG and Lab will be able to work them out.

I wonder is that why :

Quote: ''Government sources insist that plans to establish NAMA are advancing quickly''.