The future role of the CHAT Forum vis a vis the resolution of the Kaupthing debacle

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
Posted: Mon, 01/06/2009 - 10:26

The Forum is like 'Topsy' and is growing topsy turvy! I have to say I am at a complete loss to understand what ng is seeking to accomplish by uniltaterally introducing his latest ideas for the role of the Chat Forum, for which he seeks support via the latest poll. The Chat Forum is complex enough without it being made into an even larger 'hydra' [(Greek mythology) monster with nine heads; when struck off each head was replaced by two new ones].

Personally I feel that this CHAT Forum has seved its purpose. **If it is to serve any useful purpose in the context of where we are now vis a vis the DCS scenario then I feel it needs cutting right back to focus on the key issues that form the agenda of the Strategy Team. Then members can choose to back what the Strategy Team is asking of the body corporate. Individual members are, of course, free to pursue their own private efforts to get back their money. I have to say that there's some great things being done by some individuals which I believe the Strategy Team welcomes.

In the present DCS scenario the focus of the DAG's objective is to overcome the hurdles that are blocking a speedy return of everyone's money. The Strategy Team firmly believes that although the IoM does not have a bank of last resort , it has 20 banks with something in the order of £56-60 billion on deposit between them. Knowing this it doesn't take a great deal of imagination to see how the AAA-Rated IoM can't come up with a plan to solve the Kaupthing mess.

I firmly believe that the Kaupthing issue could be settled by the IoM Treasury securing a loan from the banks in order to return forthwith all deposits. The colateral for the loan would be the assets of the bank, & the loan would be repaid as those assets are realised.

I am not an accountant, but my back-of-the-envelope reckoning is the banks & IoM government would in fact get a good return on the loan by the time all assets are recovered. Indeed there would be no need for the Liquidator to be employed as the loan, the colateral & the administration of the loan could be put in the hands of the Treasury. Someone do please tell me if this does not make sense.

ng has set up a new DAG Chat Forum at The Forum 'Topsy' is growing topsy turvy! I have to say I am at a complete loss to understand what ng is seeking to accomplish by uniltaterally introducing his latest ideas for the role of the Chat Forum, which he seeks support via the latest poll. . The Chat Forum is complex enough without it being made into an even larger 'hydra' [(Greek mythology) monster with nine heads; when struck off each head was replaced by two new ones].

If this CHAT Forum is to serve any useful purpose in the context of where we are now vis a vis the DCS scenario then I feel it needs cutting right back to focus on the key issues that form the agenda of the Strategy Team. Then members can choose to back what the Strategy Team is asking of the body corporate. [Individual members are, of course, free to act in their own right in their personal efforts to get back all their money].

In the present DCS scenario the focus of the DAG's objective is to overcome the hurdles that are blocking a speedy return of everyone's money. The Strategy Team firmly believes that although the IoM does not have a bank of last resort , it has 20 banks with something in the order of £56-60 billion on deposit between them. It doesn't take a great deal of imagination to see how the AAA-Rated IoM can't come up with a plan to solve the Kaupthing mess.

I firmly believe that the Kaupthing issue could be settled by the IoM Treasury securing a loan from the banks in order to return forthwith all deposits. The colateral for the loan would be the assets of the bank, & the loan would be repaid as those assets are realised.

I am not an accountant, but my back-of-the-envelope reckoning is the banks would in fact get a good return on the loan by the time all assets are recovered. Indeed there would be no need for the Liquidator to be employed as the loan, the colateral & the administration of the loan could be put in the hands of the Treasury. Someone do please tell me if this does not make sense.

ng has set up a new DAG Chat Forum The Forum 'Topsy' is growing topsy turvy! I have to say I am at a complete loss to understand what ng is seeking to accomplish by uniltaterally introducing his latest ideas for the role of the Chat Forum, which he seeks support via the latest poll. . The Chat Forum is complex enough without it being made into an even larger 'hydra' [(Greek mythology) monster with nine heads; when struck off each head was replaced by two new ones].

If this CHAT Forum is to serve any useful purpose in the context of where we are now vis a vis the DCS scenario then I feel it needs cutting right back to focus on the key issues that form the agenda of the Strategy Team. Then members can choose to back what the Strategy Team is asking of the body corporate. [Individual members are, of course, free to act in their own right in their personal efforts to get back all their money].

In the present DCS scenario the focus of the DAG's objective is to overcome the hurdles that are blocking a speedy return of everyone's money. The Strategy Team firmly believes that although the IoM does not have a bank of last resort , it has 20 banks with something in the order of £56-60 billion on deposit between them. It doesn't take a great deal of imagination to see how the AAA-Rated IoM can't come up with a plan to solve the Kaupthing mess.

I firmly believe that the Kaupthing issue could be settled by the IoM Treasury securing a loan from the banks in order to return forthwith all deposits. The colateral for the loan would be the assets of the bank, & the loan would be repaid as those assets are realised.

I am not an accountant, but my back-of-the-envelope reckoning is the banks would in fact get a good return on the loan by the time all assets are recovered. Indeed there would be no need for the Liquidator to be employed as the loan, the colateral & the administration of the loan could be put in the hands of the Treasury. Someone do please tell me if this does not make sense.

ng has set up a new DAG Chat Forum at www.whenbankscrash.com so I persoanally think this Forum has served its purpose.
The findings of the Poll I floated show quite clearly that a large majority of members who voted want to be able to access a free DAG website that is easy to navigate & gives them all the information they need to see the progress that is being made to accomplish the DAG's Mission.

A benefactor has offered to pay all the costs of a new website and in the light of what the majority of memers are asking for this is now under construction.

1
Your rating: None Average: 1 (3 votes)

Comment viewing options
Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thread closed as reposted at:

  • ng
  • 11/10/08 31/12/20
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 01/06/2009 - 11:21

Apologies ...something's gone wrong with this post!

  • Lucky Jim
  • 13/10/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 01/06/2009 - 10:32

Sorry about this, but there's something gone wrong with the posting of this topic & I am unable to edit it to correct it! It's gone 'topsy-turvey'!!