Do people want the bank to run at a loss and the state to have to bail them out again?
and the average increase is around €13.75 per month.
VS the potential hardship it causes for 50,000 account holders,
I would also point out that the PTSB hasn't taken any type of bail out.
There may be more to it than the interest income.
Some affected borrowers will move to a different lender, improving PTSB's capital ratios. Unfortunately this may decrease the quality of the remaining loan book, as those borrowers most able to move will be those least likely to default.
New borrowers will be discouraged from even applying, reducing costs on the input side.
I heard the figures of between 40 and 50 million income extra been mentioned by Irish brokers/analysts.
They aint doing it for 8 million.
Do people want the bank to run at a loss and the state to have to bail them out again?
I find it hard to reconcile these two quotes from Indiansign's posts
In which case, as I supposed above, they must expect to make more in the future either when fixed rates come off the fix or with new business.I am quoting the figures widely used by the Bank's CEO last week. Average increase of eur13.75 per month, for 50,000 customers.
In which case, as I supposed above, they must expect to make more in the future either when fixed rates come off the fix or with new business.
This puzzles me - why take all the flak, put bank staff in the firing line etc - when, according to their CEO, on various TV & Radio outlets over the past week, the recent .5% interest rate increase on their variable rate mortgage will effect 50,000 customers (I take it he means accounts), and the average increase is around €13.75 per month.
This puzzles me - why take all the flak, put bank staff in the firing line etc - when, according to their CEO, on various TV & Radio outlets over the past week, the recent .5% interest rate increase on their variable rate mortgage will effect 50,000 customers (I take it he means accounts), and the average increase is around €13.75 per month.
This means they have just increased income by €8.25m per annum, less whatever costs they may have associated with this move. This seems a ridiculously small amount (in banking terms), and makes me question (again) Brian Lenihan's public defence of the move on the basis that "Unfortunately this increase reflects commercial market realities, including the increased cost of accessing funds"
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?