Why is Bob Diamond being grilled over his bonus?

Tute · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:12

I think the worry is that if this happened again, the reckless spending might send Barclays to the cash pot with cap in hand.

However, they didn't ask for a bailout, so really the government should stay back and let them get on with it. I don't agree with these huge bonuses but Barclays have shown they can manage it and not get into difficulty. So let them be.

[TW]Fox · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:13

scorza said:
They can do as they please when the banking industry can stand on its own two feet and when it has reformed so this situation won't happen again in future.

Barclays did not ask for assistance and did not receive assistance.

They are a private organisation. They are free to do whatever they want, within the confines of the law.

Thankfully we dont make laws around bitter people like yourselves.

Why is almost everything you post either wrong or motivated by jealously for those in a more fortunate position than you?

I'm sorry to hear you didnt make it in life as far as those as you constantly **** off over the internet but it's getting boring now.

What private industry does with it's management is of no concern to you.

cymatty · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:14

Superewza said:
Of course. There is no problem. Everything is okay. The bankers are working for your benefit, not their own and their already massive salary is most certainly not enough, never mind these tiny sums, even those of us who are struggling to afford food and shelter should dig deep and pay them out of our own pockets. All money to the kind hearted bankers!

Do you pay a monthly account fee for your current account?

dowie · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:15

Robbie G said:
People keep using this provocative word, 'bailout'. Barclays were not bailed out, they were invested in!

Well the fact that Barclays didn't do as badly as RBS etc.. was mostly down to luck rather than decisions of senior management.

Danthus · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:15

Superewza said:
Of course. There is no problem. Everything is okay. The bankers are working for your benefit, not their own and their already massive salary is most certainly not enough, never mind these tiny sums, even those of us who are struggling to afford food and shelter should dig deep and pay them out of our own pockets. All money to the kind hearted bankers!

More baseless banker bashing. You need to start looking at the deficit and the reason behind it, out of control spending and a grossly dysfunctional welfare system to name a few.

Will Gill · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:15

cymatty said:
Do you pay a monthly account fee for your current account?

No, and ontop of that I also receive interest on cash, that's besides the point! Banks are bad and all the homeless people should get an equal division of all the salaries within the banking sector, they are to blame for everything.

cymatty · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:17

Will Gill said:
No, and ontop of that I also receive interest on cash, that's besides the point! Banks are bad and all the homeless people should get an equal division of all the salaries within the banking sector, they are to blame for everything.

You broke my sarcasm detector.

[TW]Fox · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:17

Superewza said:
Of course. There is no problem. Everything is okay. The bankers are working for your benefit, not their own and their already massive salary is most certainly not enough, never mind these tiny sums, even those of us who are struggling to afford food and shelter should dig deep and pay them out of our own pockets. All money to the kind hearted bankers!

They are privately employed individuals working not for you but for an organisation which has a duty to maximise shareholder value.

PermaBanned · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:18

cymatty said:
Do you pay a monthly account fee for your current account?

No.

OldCoals said:
More baseless banker bashing. You need to start looking at the deficit and the reason behind it, out of control spending and a grossly dysfunctional welfare system to name a few.

I don't see where i 'bashed the bankers'. I think you need to read my post again.

Everything really is okay!

Participant · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:19

dowie said:
Well the fact that Barclays didn't do as badly as RBS etc.. was mostly down to luck rather than decisions of senior management.

Even if that were true, so what?

PermaBanned · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:22

[TW]Fox;18203648 said:
They are privately employed individuals working not for you but for an organisation which has a duty to maximise shareholder value.

Which is precisely why everything is okay. There is no problem. Keep buying things you don't need to fix the economy!

Danthus · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:24

Superewza said:
Which is precisely why everything is okay. There is no problem. Keep buying things you don't need to fix the economy!

Are the banks the cause of the budget deficit?

Xordium · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:26

OldCoals said:
Are the banks the cause of the budget deficit?

I thought that was down to the Iron Chancellor (TM)

PermaBanned · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:26

OldCoals said:
Are the banks the cause of the budget deficit?

I don't know, but it's vitally important that we all go to town immediately and buy as many meaningful things as we can so as to fix the economy and to make us happy! Who could possibly be happy without smelling like artificial fruit?

shine · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:28

Superewza said:
Which is precisely why everything is okay. There is no problem. Keep buying things you don't need to fix the economy!

Will reducing bonuses fix the economy?

Participant · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:28

Superewza said:
Of course. There is no problem. Everything is okay. The bankers are working for your benefit, not their own and their already massive salary is most certainly not enough, never mind these tiny sums, even those of us who are struggling to afford food and shelter should dig deep and pay them out of our own pockets. All money to the kind hearted bankers!

People struggling to afford food and shelter should have tried harder at school.

Why is it never the fault of the individual?

I'm an advocate of benefits for the disadvantaged, but not the lazy.

Danthus · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:28

What are you talking about?

Edit - Superduppawurzle.

explicit4u · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:32

Robbie G said:
People struggling to afford food and shelter should have tried harder at school.

While that does apply to some people you simply cannot make a statement like that. There's hundreds of reasons why people hit rock bottom, sometimes it's through no fault of their own.

Participant · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:34

explicit4u said:
While that does apply to some people you simply cannot make a statement like that. There's hundreds of reasons why people hit rock bottom, sometimes it's through no fault of their own.

I agree. That's why I tried to qualify that comment with:

Robbie G said:
I'm an advocate of benefits for the disadvantaged

dowie · 11 Jan 2011 at 20:35

Robbie G said:
Even if that were true, so what?

Well its the implications of it - he's taking a bonus at a time where things are still politically sensitive.

I don't have any issue with a trader who would expect a % of PnL getting his bonus as he is directly contributing to the banks bottom line. However people in Diamond's position do share a decent portion of blame for the crisis and should be cautious about taking large bonuses - these were the guys who were supposed to look at the big picture etc... and these are the guys who should take a hit - I'm not saying the govt should intervene and dictate to the bank how much to pay this guy but the bank itself should be advised to be sensitive still to the current climate.

In reality I don't think the guy deserves a huge bonus anyway - both Barclays and RBS went into a bidding war for ABN - Barclays failed - RBS won the bid and as a result got severely damaged in the credit crisis, Barclays got off lightly simply because senior management failed. They then got incredibly lucky with Lehman brothers (and made a killing simply because they were in the right place at the right time having failed to win the ABN bid) and were also fortunate that various western governments were prepared to bail out their counter parties. Had they won the ABN bid they'd have been screwed, had various other banks not been propped up by the govt then the whole sector would have been screwed.

They didn't receive govt assistance directly but they still benefited from the fact their counter parties essentially got underwritten by the govt.