Friday, January 23, 2009
DT got the DTs
The DT has been sitting in the temple of doom for months now. Any excuse is good enough for a stonking great headline. But yesterday, or the day before, they seemed to be hedging their bets. Half their commentators were saying that what the government was doing was terrible and half were saying that they had got it about right. Painful but necessary sort of thing. But the editorial had the cheek to have a go at the government for not building confidence. The whole sorry mess was a result of a massive loss of confidence. Brown & Darling should get out there and rebuild it. Never mind about tinkering with banking rules and regulations. So will the DT be taking a dose of its own medicine following their saccarhine coverage of events over the water? Have they got the saccarhine habit?
I have done my modest bit of confidence building with a modest punt on RBS shares, presently worth one fiftieth of what whey were worth a bit more than a year ago. According to the DT their bad debts account for a modest 1% of their balance sheet so maybe the all knowing market has overreacted a bit on this occasion. The first time I have done such a thing - which has become very easy with the advent of (HSBC) internet banking. It seems to be as quick and easy as putting a bet on at the bookies, with the charges not looking too bad. Better than those which are applied to the occasional but not singular lapse of vigilance which results in a shortlived informal overdraft.
These came with a surprising amount of flannel about how we could complain if we were not satisfied. And how we could get in touch with an HSBC financial advisor to help us through the maze of managing our own money. Presunably they have lots of customers who moan about their charges and lots of customers who find managing their insufficient monies difficult. For myself, the charging arrangements for informal overdrafts seem a bit capricious - and out of all proportion to the cost of the money involved for the period involved, which was pence rather than pounds. I suppose their angle is that penal charges for informal overdrafts are a more customer friendly way of getting paid for their services than bank charges. Overall, they get less whining and more custom.
I have done my modest bit of confidence building with a modest punt on RBS shares, presently worth one fiftieth of what whey were worth a bit more than a year ago. According to the DT their bad debts account for a modest 1% of their balance sheet so maybe the all knowing market has overreacted a bit on this occasion. The first time I have done such a thing - which has become very easy with the advent of (HSBC) internet banking. It seems to be as quick and easy as putting a bet on at the bookies, with the charges not looking too bad. Better than those which are applied to the occasional but not singular lapse of vigilance which results in a shortlived informal overdraft.
These came with a surprising amount of flannel about how we could complain if we were not satisfied. And how we could get in touch with an HSBC financial advisor to help us through the maze of managing our own money. Presunably they have lots of customers who moan about their charges and lots of customers who find managing their insufficient monies difficult. For myself, the charging arrangements for informal overdrafts seem a bit capricious - and out of all proportion to the cost of the money involved for the period involved, which was pence rather than pounds. I suppose their angle is that penal charges for informal overdrafts are a more customer friendly way of getting paid for their services than bank charges. Overall, they get less whining and more custom.
# posted by Jim @ 6:18 AM 
