Skip to content

NatWest shares sunk to the bottom of the FTSE 100 following the resignation of chief executive Dame Alison Rose.

There is no way that Nat West is now valued around £1 billion. Abnout the bottom of the FTSE100 that is.

14 thoughts on “Sigh”

  1. Sorry, but who cares about Alison Rose going? She wasn’t Steve Jobs or Michael O’Leary. She was the sort of caretaker CEO who collects a nice salary and bonuses while the business runs on autopilot. There’s probably 2 dozen people at NatWest who can do the job just as well.

    Shares down 3.66%? Might be worth a good short term punt as results are out on Friday.

  2. There’s probably 2 dozen people at NatWest who can do the job just as well.

    Natwest, or to give it its proper identity, is RBS in sheep’s clothing (RBS is the ultimate holding compeny, is the selected trading name because the RBS name was so toxic. What it actually needs is someone who can do the job better than Dame Rose.
    I’ve had a couple of dealings with her office over embarrassing fuck-ups on my account and I must say I have not been impressed with the intellectual capacity of her staff.

  3. I think UKFA still holds 39%. Partly explains why the Farage Furore went up to Downing St, but that’s also a serious slug of liquidity out of the market.

    The sector’s broadly off on the back of Rose, although there’s a bit of uncertainty knocking about anyway due to the Fed decision.

    The problem is that the markets don’t really know if there’s anything else a la Farage coming down the line, particularly given the meeting with Griffin.

    I wouldn’t personally want to assume that NatWest’s results are going to be particularly brilliant anyway. Not right now, and there’s the fact that any impact on the group might not show up until the next set of numbers.

  4. They, and AR, would have been in a much better position if they had kept Farage’s account and said “we don’t discriminate on political or any other basis. If any account holder is unhappy with this then they are free to find another bank.”

    But of course all these companies are deadly afraid of the Twitter etc pile-on. In past times no-one would have known that Farage banked at Coutts.

  5. Don’t worry about Alison Rose, she’ll soon be back in some massively-paid public sector sinecure.

    That’s the way it works for people like her.

    See also under Dido Harding.

  6. Martin Near The M25

    True. I’d guess that, after a massive failure like this, taxpayers money will be thrown in her direction like confetti.

  7. Has Murphy pointed out yet that Dame Alison should never have offered ‘insufficient funds’ as a reason for closing Farage’s account, as banks don’t need customers’ funds?

  8. There powers that be, get a win win from this Farage debacle.

    Sure Farage had come out on top, but he is a public figure with a massive media presence. Anyone else even slightly right of centre is now aware that their bank account and thus much of the easy running of their life can be disrupted at any moment should they upset the wrong person or be public with their views.

  9. Well the whole affair’s bringing added value to the phrase “Go woke, go broke”, isn’t it?

  10. Was anyone listening to Radio 4 this morning, around twenty past eight or thereabouts?

    When Farage was on as a guest?

    When the presenter asked a question, Farage said something like “I’ve had enough of your condescending attitude” and the presenter said “Oh, come on Nigel, I’m teasing you”?

    Did I imagine that, ‘cos it seems to be increasingly bizarre.

  11. @Tractor Gent – “They, and AR, would have been in a much better position if they had kept Farage’s account and said “we don’t discriminate on political or any other basis.”

    You mean if they had had a policy of inclusivity?

    Good idea, but it’ll never catch on.

  12. Hah, hah, hah.

    “don’t discriminate on political or any other basis”

    Hee, hee, hee, I’m the Laughing Gnome etc, etc.

    Anyway, as far as I can see, Farage’s problems start once he pays off a mortgage. That means income to the bank decreases.

    As far as it goes, the wealth, or liquid asset requirements, for the private(*) banking service, is a wee bit of a mask. It’s actually a proxy for expected fee/commission/turn/spread income for the bank, which ultimately boils down to the margin, WRT OGH’s other post/thread.

    So, if you had, say, half a bar of liquid assets, and base rates were 5%, the private banking service would expect (these are very old numbers) to make getting on for £24,000 per year from “servicing” your account at an absolute minimum.

    *”Private” is a seriously big fucking clue. Exactly how Rose, the Reputational Risk Committee, and the fucking Board managed to miss it and continued to do so when explicitly given a second opportunity is going to be interesting. Good Ol’ Dishi(+) and The Grand Master Hunt can’t have been expecting this level of shit, but here they are, suddenly having to deal with a bunch of utter fucking cretins distributed probably across the entire sector.

    + How exactly does the prick consistently fail to buy a pair of trousers that don’t have a row with his socks? Jesus H Christ.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *