Front page of todays Indo has a story about the liquidation of a building company who owes €1bn being prevented by the sudden appearance of "secret investors".
Where is this money coming from and why is it a secret? Has it been loaned by a bank? One that is covered by the State guarantee? Who would have this amount of cash to spare? Why would they lend it?
Am I missing something here?
http://www.independent.ie/national-...-head-off-83641bn-property-crash-1831813.html
Bottom Line - It really is nobody's business who the Investors are or might be.
The real story in that article is the attitude of foreign banks to the setting up of NAMA. They have obviously decided that they want to recover what the hell they can and get out of dodge.
I wonder if our banks are taking the same hard line and making efforts to recover money they have lent overseas?
Very good question? Does anybody know??
Did Anglo pull the plug on a few companies in the UK recently?
Very good question? Does anybody know??
Did Anglo pull the plug on a few companies in the UK recently? Or perhaps this isnt the same sort of thing Rabobank and Danske are doing at the moment?
Bottom Line - It really is nobody's business who the Investors are or might be.
Grim, isn't it? The little whispering voice in the back of your mind saying "something doesn't smell right about this" is now screaming "it stinks of corruption".I was a firm believer in Hanlon's Razor - "Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." - when it came to the government's response to the property/banking crisis and I've railed against what I perceived to be stupidity on the part of the government here. I'm really not sure any more; it's very difficult not to believe in a political/property/banking conspiracy when you read about stuff like this.
Just to clarify why I think the NAMA plan is likely to become unfeasible if the receiver were called in on Carroll's companies. No bank will sell its loans to NAMA at true market value. The market value of a loan depends on a combination of the solvency of the debtor and the value of the collateral securing the loan. A receiver driven fire sale of Carroll's development land would establish a market value for the latter (which seems in Carroll's case to be somewhere between 25% and perhaps 40% of the value of the loans). Assuming cash flow problems with the big developers (a reasonable assumption), the market value of the collateral establishes the floor for the market value of the loans. The banks cannot sell their loans at even 50% of their value as they would quickly become insolvent. The other option, for NAMA to pay two to three times the market value of the loans is not a runner either given that the entire venture is going to be backed by a massive government bond issue which will have to be reviewed by the EU and the ECB since the purpose is for the bonds to be turned into cash for the banks using repo with the ECB, I simply cannot see how it would be given the green light.
The government''s rush to get NAMA up and going as fast as possible is motivated by a recognition of this danger.
Such is the urgency of the mammoth litigation, Mr Justice Peter Kelly, who is in charge of Ireland's "big business" Commercial Court, has offered to sit during the court's summer holiday to deal with motions relating to the actions.
"Commerce doesn't stop because lawyers go on holiday," Judge Kelly told the court on Monday.
Justice Kelly seems to take the view that the Commercial court should sit permanently:
As I understand it, he will be in court on Tuesday to continue adjudication on the Carroll case.
So we may get no respite!
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?