Northern Rock bonus/loan repayment (1 Viewer)

[GaryPanic]

Several Points Gary.
1. Most companies only pay a bonus if they are making a profit and specific targets are met - not true in the case of the banks who seem to think they desrve bonuses for being bailed out by the tax payer.

2. The fact you are getting a salary should be an incentive to do the job.

3. Good people don't necessarily move if they don't get a bonus. What's wrong with giving them a pay rise or promotion. anyway no-one is indispensible.

agree in principle ..
But NR were given a target and if they met the repayment target they would be given a bonus - (this target was set after the bail out and is in response to the bail out) so they have repaid 50% of the outstanding loan from the goverment and have been award a bonus (we are not talking big bucks we are talking about the little guys here - roughly 1K each) - so the drain on the tax payer has reduced by X - ok so if they had taken longer to pay this back then we the tax payer would be out of pocket by X - by this bonus - or effectively a write off of debt of less than 1% -see the orginal post) this has to be a good thing for the country - this answer your first point - target set - target achived bonus given

2 Yes I agree - but certain jobs are perfomance related - and as such bonus are part and parcel of this (ignore banks for the moment) so bonuses are not the evil that seems to be given - Bankers bonuses I will grant you are well over the top - but if John Wayne was given a target of X and any thing above this is subject to a bonus - then what is wrong with this ?

3 Payrise /promotion is not always a good thing - a good sales person - promoted to a management job might make a awful manger - but a sales person could be rewarded with a bonus -
I know people who have turned down management - so that they can stay in the job they are good at and have bonuses are rewards

we we mention Bonuses we all automatically think of Big Bankers with £100,000 as the bonus - that is not what is being highlighted here

we are talking about the admin-staff junior management at best ...
bonuses are probably less than 2500 max


and are 0.06% of the amount lent - so this as a write off seems a boodly good deal

 

[scott-atkinson]

I'm on line to get a bonus this year, 10% of my salary.... My company has made a profit and I have performed well. If my company had not made a profit and I had still performed well I would not be getting a Bonus....

My bonus will be paid to all my creditors, as a result of the banks bringing down the economy and me not being able to afford to pay my bills or or my mortgage any more..

Where is my incentive...

Bankers do not deserve Bonuses, unless their company is in profit...

As we the tax payer have had to bail out the banks, thus them not making a profit, then they should not get bonuses... Simple.. and does not need any arguments about it at all...Completely black and white..

Nuff said.

 

[ColinEssex]

As we the tax payer have had to bail out the banks, thus them not making a profit, then they should not get bonuses... Simple.. and does not need any arguments about it at all...Completely black and white..

Nuff said.

I agree. But I bet Gary won't. He seems to be of the impression that a bonus is a bonus no matter what.

Col

 

[GaryPanic]

No .. what I am trying to say is that NR has recovered and paid back X amount and that the bonus is a write off of 0.06% of the amount thay have recovered - if we could write off all off our debit but it only cost us 0.06% of this to process thats a good deal --
if you offered this deal to a debt recoverey agency - they would not take it as they would want 5% of the debt as a admin charge ...

bonus for Bankers I am against as such ,
but not bonuses in general (which can be a great incentive- but I acknowledge that there needs to be controls in place for them)


With NR we bailed them out by billions they ahve paid back 50 %

 

[GaryPanic]

NR have paid back 13 Billion at a cost of 8 million pounds in bonus

the tax bill for the 13 billlion works out at lots -however the tax cost of the bonus for repaying this is 0.06 of the cost of the 13 billions

Now i am not defending the bailout of the banking system - what i am trying to get to is that they have reduced the tax bill by 99.94 % on this 13 billion
yes I know there is another 13 billion still to be paid - but it is 50% less

from all accounts they should also repay 50% of the remaining 13 billion ahead of time (and get another bonus) - this is reducing the tax burden -

now if they didn't pay this back quickly then the tax payer is paying for it longer than could and the cost of maintaining this to the tax payer is more than the bonus that is being given away

looking at this from a tax payers point of view - I will take a lower tax any day

 

[GaryPanic]

keeping it simple
and in relation to the 13 billion paid back

it cost 1.00 to service this per person un paid PA
now it will cost 0.06 to clear this - would you rather pay 1.00 PA or 0.06 (once) to get rid of a liability

The bonus element is basically the write off fee -
if we stop looking at the size of the bonus/write off and look at percentages
it becoems more attrative

 

[GaryPanic]

Ok according to recent figures
we owe 1 trillion £
giving that this is 1,000,000,000,000
and that NR have paid back
13 billion 13,000,000,000
I make this 13% of the total paid back within 2 years (just from 1 bank)

Now thats pretty good considering that NR is a relatively small bank (admittantly big book of morgages), if all the others manage to pay back 50% within 2 years -(a) i would be amazed (b) relieved

Now no way am I suggesting that we shoudl reward them for being stupid - but the actual real workers (the small guys) need a pat on the back and a reward would be the best way of doing this assuming the same 0.06% payoff ratio

News today says that we each owe (according to this goverments **** up) 33,000 - now if that is reduced to 1,980, i could live with that - as this could be recovered by indiect taxation or an increase in top rate tax level (which is where the top cats would be hurt the most)

 

[GaryPanic]

Isn't it 1.3 % ?

it might be ...a trillion is 1 million 1million
1,000,000,000,000
a billion is 1000 million
1,000,000,000
so
13billion is
13,000,000,000
trillion
1,000,000,000,000

13/1000

yep 1.3% -

stupid me ....

 

[ColinEssex]

So you reckon we should all get a bonus for paying our debts. I shall phone Northern Rock to enquire how much they are paying me as a bonus. As my mortgage debt repayment goes to them.

I owe £700 on a credit card (at 0% till July) do you think they will give me a bonus for paying it off in the 0% period?

Or is it only bankers that get bonus's - once when the bank fails and needs a bailout then they get another bonus for paying back the bail-out money. TWO bonus's? Can't be bad, wish I had gone into banking, seems you can't lose either way.

Col

 

[GaryPanic]

"I owe £700 on a credit card (at 0% till July) do you think they will give me a bonus for paying it off in the 0% period"

In a way this is the bonus up front -isn't it? pay off in this time and no interest ,after which it is 16% ??

 

[GaryPanic]

Yeah , I'll give you that...

 

[scott-atkinson]

NR have paid back 13 Billion at a cost of 8 million pounds in bonus

the tax bill for the 13 billlion works out at lots -however the tax cost of the bonus for repaying this is 0.06 of the cost of the 13 billions

Now i am not defending the bailout of the banking system - what i am trying to get to is that they have reduced the tax bill by 99.94 % on this 13 billion
yes I know there is another 13 billion still to be paid - but it is 50% less

from all accounts they should also repay 50% of the remaining 13 billion ahead of time (and get another bonus) - this is reducing the tax burden -

now if they didn't pay this back quickly then the tax payer is paying for it longer than could and the cost of maintaining this to the tax payer is more than the bonus that is being given away

looking at this from a tax payers point of view - I will take a lower tax any day

I simply can't believe the Bull that I am reading...

Do you work for Northern Rock, does somebody you know gonna get a bonus from Northern Rock and your in line for a bunce...

By your reckoning, when the bailiffs come round to my house demanding payment, I should ask them that if I pay 50% now will they give me some money back...

Yeah, I can just see the smug grin on the Wa*kers face now...

The banking sector, and the Government are the reasons that I have lost my house and am in debt to the tune of about 130k, based on mortgage shortfalls and credit debt...

Now ... Gary.... Where do I queue up to get my bonus....

 

[scott-atkinson]

I Guess I killed this Thread.... huh

 

[GaryPanic]

No not really -

what I was trying to get accross is that by paying 50% off the loan - the amount owned to the tax payer is reduced (and the tax payer is paying less * just for this bank) .


Which is good and as they have paid this back 24 months earlier than they envisaged the interest we have saved is worth the 0.06% of the loan ( doing this on pure mathmatics and ignoring the argument of bonuses )

If you run a business and you had bad debts and your got these paid off but you had to waiver 0.06% of the debt - would that be a good deal
yes ?, the write off is minimal to the amount and it increases your cash flow

most business have a 20 % bad debtors problem - now 90% of this 20% will be paid - but it will be late and 10% is a real headache to get back

now if we reduced this to 10% at a stroke then wrote off 0.06% for doing this - any business would be over the moon on it -

..
the thread went off tangent a bit down the route of bonuses and bonuses in respect to bankers in particular

i still stand by Bonuses are not totally evil - however they have to be performance related - car sales reps have bonuses -

 

[GaryPanic]

Yep - its in his interest to sell you a lemon you don't want - and to move job. Not in the companies interest as their rep declines or in the clients?

Evil!

No - not really - why did you go into the car shop - you were interested in buying a car - so its not a total lemon-otherwise why have adverts ...
there are certain adverts that work on the basis that if you enquire through them they get a cut of the money - so its in their interest

 

[scott-atkinson]

No not really -

what I was trying to get accross is that by paying 50% off the loan - the amount owned to the tax payer is reduced (and the tax payer is paying less * just for this bank) .


Which is good and as they have paid this back 24 months earlier than they envisaged the interest we have saved is worth the 0.06% of the loan ( doing this on pure mathmatics and ignoring the argument of bonuses )

If you run a business and you had bad debts and your got these paid off but you had to waiver 0.06% of the debt - would that be a good deal
yes ?, the write off is minimal to the amount and it increases your cash flow

most business have a 20 % bad debtors problem - now 90% of this 20% will be paid - but it will be late and 10% is a real headache to get back

now if we reduced this to 10% at a stroke then wrote off 0.06% for doing this - any business would be over the moon on it -

..
the thread went off tangent a bit down the route of bonuses and bonuses in respect to bankers in particular

i still stand by Bonuses are not totally evil - however they have to be performance related - car sales reps have bonuses -

I don't care what you say it is still my tax that is paying their bonus for fu*king up in the first place.

Does the government pay me a bonus because I pay my tax on time.. No it doesn't.

Do I get a bonus if I pay my bills early... no I do not..

The banking sector have taken the p*ss for far too long, and for me if I had my way they would not have got a penny and they should have all gone under... F*ck um all...

 

[GaryPanic]

I don't care what you say it is still my tax that is paying their bonus for fu*king up in the first place. (1) Agree

Does the government pay me a bonus because I pay my tax on time.. No it doesn't.

Do I get a bonus if I pay my bills early... no I do not..

The banking sector have taken the p*ss for far too long, and for me if I had my way they would not have got a penny and they should have all gone under... F*ck um all...

(2) agree

(1) The bank could of sat on the early payment money and live off the interest - which you would of gone off the deep end -
(2) they will get even worse - soon you will have to pay to have an account - write a cheque /cash a cheque - take money from your account

 

[Alc]

Just when the thread was settling down...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7906922.stm

 

[scott-atkinson]

Just when the thread was settling down...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7906922.stm

Thieving Hevens......

So if I am underwriting the banks debt, does that mean that they are going to write off the £1500 that they are trying to take me to court about...

Does it hell...

They will make me pay twice...

If my tax is paying for my debt, then why should I pay twice...

Wan*ers...

 

[scott-atkinson]

(2) agree

(1) The bank could of sat on the early payment money and live off the interest - which you would of gone off the deep end -
(2) they will get even worse - soon you will have to pay to have an account - write a cheque /cash a cheque - take money from your account

I have gone off the deep end because the banks and the Government have forced me to relocate my family, take my children out of a school that they liked away from all their friends and move to some god forsaken place on earth...

I think going off the deep end I am entitled to do...