Saturday, 1 November 2008

Barclays

I was going to do a long post about Barclays tying up its deal with Abu Dhabi and Qatar, as it ties in with what I said the other day about the dangers around bank pay, but it's all over the papers and so I've not much to add.

Needless to say it has gone down badly with existing shareholders, who wonder why Barclays wants to pay more in order to be owned by gulf states rather than part-nationalised good old blighty. And already the argument is being made that this is in part because Barclays execs don't want anyone touching their pay. Maybe not the best way to make yourself popular with your constumers!

Yesterday's Alphaville says it all:

"Can the avoidance of having the government on your shareholder register really be so great that you are prepared to effectively pay 50 per cent more for your capital?And why no pre-emption rights, especially when new stock is being offered at a 25 per cent discount?... Crass as it sounds, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that this is about protecting executive salaries and keeping the books under wraps. And still there’s execution risk here: shareholders have to vote on this. Expect a rowdy meeting on November 24."

http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/10/31/17674/barclays-capital-raising-the-real-cost-of-bob-diamond/

2 comments:

Mark Still News said...

It is time the banks were sequestrated by the government and fat bankers eradicated?

Paulie said...

Rowdy? Maybe, but you will have your central thesis proven if (!) it isn't rowdy enough.