TOO MANY FORUMS - TOO MUCH BICKERING!

  • Anonymous
  • unspecified
  • Offline
Posted: Mon, 19/01/2009 - 14:50

As a KSFIOM depositor I have been reading the postings on this site nearly every day for over 14 weeks. In the beginning it was of great value, but it is now becoming increasingly time-consuming to find new, meaningful factual information - to sift through all the bickering, personal invectives, uninformed ramblings, doom and gloom forecasts and some bright ideas - getting us nowhere. There are just too many forums and threads. It is difficult to find a specific posting without a "search" tool. Some way of streamlining the site is needed but I guess this will take time and money to accomplish. We just want our money back, after all.

5
Your rating: None Average: 5 (1 vote)

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

TOO MANY FORUMS - TOO MUCH BICKERING!

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 20/01/2009 - 00:52

I too am fed up with the bickering, although I am often involved with it. There is a well-established pattern here:

(1) I, or someone else who holds views which differ significantly from those of the higher-value depositors and those with sympathies with the IOM government, posts an on-topic and wholly appropriate comment:

(2) Replies, calculated to distract attention from the original material, are posted by the same small group of people each time, which consists of several higher value depositors and other non-depositors, some with contacts in the IoM government and regulator. The replies falsely allege hidden agendas and seek to intimidate by making other false allegations and threats to disclose personal information about the original poster;

(3) The informative, on-topic and useful information contained in the original posting is buried in an avalanche of bickering, which is obviously the intention of the group of people referred to above.

While it is understandable that strong feelings should be involved, given the amount of money at stake (murders have been committed over a 10,000th or even 100,000th of the total owed to depositors), it is hard to understand why several of the people involved are not depositors at all and why others appear to be furthering personal vendettas completely unrelated to the issues in KSF(IOM).


Its not so much the bickering

  • nivit
  • 19/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 20/01/2009 - 13:47

Its not so much the bickering that I find annoying its that the parties involved argue as if they have some real insight into for example how the DCS, if triggered would function when in fact they clearly don't. The only opinion on the DCS worth having is that of the IoM government and with that in mind I suggest that we all contact them, present them with our individual situation, and demand to know how the DCS would function for us individually.


re - Its not so much the bickering

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 20/01/2009 - 14:21

nivit - that's the crux of the matter, even IoMG don't know how the DCS will operate if it will the banks who have to contribute don't like it - even their total contributions to the scheme are limited to £200m not per bank / institution but as total of all contributing institutions, in addition the individual contributions are calculated on a % of the revenue - certainly over the next few years that revenue will take a sharpe decline.

Well that's my best guess at it - and as you quite rightly point out no-one on here knows any better than anyone else.

All I can say and from personal experience liquidations are a nightmare, that coupled to an unfunded compensation scheme which I have no experience of spells disaster. However there again I'm falling into the same trap and offering an opinion.......


skintagainnow: "that's the

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 20/01/2009 - 16:20

skintagainnow: "that's the crux of the matter, even IoMG don't know how the DCS will operate if it will the banks who have to contribute don't like it - even their total contributions to the scheme are limited to £200m not per bank / institution but as total of all contributing institutions"

But if the amount recovered from liquidation exceeds that figure, then the amount recovered by depositors will be determined by the former (larger amount), not the latter. If the amount recovered from liquidation is less than that figure, then the DCS will yield a larger recovery than would liquidation alone (or another scheme relying on liquidating the bank's assets).


Ok Elgee, yes I know how liquidations operate

  • skintagainnow
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 20/01/2009 - 19:17

Ok Elgee, yes I know how liquidations operate, I've been on the creditors side of 2 already :- what experience do you have, you are not offering anything constructive here.. some of your postings and research are positive gems -- others you plainly look for arguments. Once again I'm not posting anything that could be construed as a for or against any particular scheme - WE all <50K & >50K bond holders / commercial / retail require more information from IoMG than we currently have it is that plain & simple.

;- take your position for example --

do we assume you have applied for the hardship payment of £1,000.00 therefore an initial payment from PWC of 10%

£9K deposit -- PWC pays out an initial payment of £900.00 - if you have applied for the hardship payment that goes straight to the IoMG and you still owe them £100.00

DCS still owes you £8,100.00 --- ahh when will that be paid and what will be % of your deposit returned in the first stage of DCS payments

If PWC pays out 20%

£9K deposit --- PWC pays out £1800.00 - IoMG takes £1,000.00 and you get £800.00

DCS still owes you £7,200.00 --- again when will that be paid and what will be % of your deposit returned in the first stage of DCS payments.

If PWC pays out 90% (joke I know)

£9K deposit ---- PWC pays out £8,100.00 - IoMG takes £1,000.00 and you receive £7,100.00

DCS still owes you £900.00 --- again when will that be paid and what will be % of your deposit returned in the first stage of DCS payments.

When do you get the next stage payment from PWC -- this year // next year // the year after ????? it's open ended is it not, when do the IoMG start paying out from the unfunded DCS - Yes they have promised £150m to start the process is it "on tap" to start payments as soon as liquidations occur, do you know ? who does know, IoMG ??? they not saying...

What they have said is that the £150m is for all failures in 2008 > Oct 2009, does this mean no payment from DCS until October, or will they "take a risk" and pay a small % out to the creditors prior to that date - wow if they take the that risk - what will be that % be - would it match PWC's interim payment of 10% - or would they cap -- another "hardship" payment £1000.00 per account. Again looking at your own deposit onn a 10% DCS payment you would receive an additional £900.00 less the £100.00 you owe IoMG leaving £800.00 to your good self.

Next stage payment from PWC - only when they feel they have recovered and liquefied sufficient assets to warrant a payment -- what are we waiting -- loan book -- if all still paying well he may have a few million back - or has he sold it Ok he realised 20% of it's face value that's another £80m in the kitty - could he manage another 10% payment from that. has KSF UK started releasing funds ????

Next stage payment from DCS - we know it'll be some time after the anniversary of the liquidation -- the banks have now paid into the fund - how much -- ooopppsss we don't know - we don't what their revenue will be over this next year - perhaps revenue will be so low and non have made the threshold, where do the funds for the DCS come from now... ah yes there's a little left from IoM £150m another couple of % or another cap?????

Oh Yes - nearly forgot about the other sting on the DCS -- any DCS payment is similar to a loan - it attracts interest and administration charges are to be applied -- who will bear the cost of these charges - it comes out of the recovered funds of the bank - yes but only those funds of the people who have applied for the LOAN or all funds - surely the more someone "borrows" from the DCS the more they will have to pay back, if I don't borrow from the DCS - why should I pay for your borrowing --- if someone has received £4,000.00 from DCS and another has received £40K should the £4,000.00 recipient be paying part of the £40K recipients interest and administration fee..... this issue has still not been fully clarified by IoMG..

Without the full disclousure of information for both possibilities be very careful what you wish for, Yes traditional liquidation and DCS does guarantee <£50K full payment - but does not place a time limit on when that full payment should be met.

SOA -- well I'm not even going to go there --- WE KNOW nothing about it.


Bickering

  • DonaldC
  • 25/11/08 31/05/09
  • not a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 20/01/2009 - 13:07

I agree entirely with the topic and with Elgee's comments.

Though not a frequent poster, I use this site for a more detailed insight into what is going on and what one might read into events, beyond what the committee feels able to post.

To that extent, I have greatly appreciated the postings made by Elgee and others as they generally provide new information. Granted, he has an agenda slant towards his own deposit level, but so does everyone to some extent. When people have spent time on their own research, they should feel free to post without being insulted by those who do not share their agenda.

It is acceptable to challenge Diver and the committee's conclusions, but NOT to make snide comments about his not working on a Sunday or being on the take from the IoM govt.

Likewise it is acceptable to emphasise a belief that the DAG should maintain as its primary objective the 100% return to all over the objective of a swift return to smaller depositors, but NOT to dismiss the <50k depositors with obnoxious comments about having lost more money down the back of the sofa than another depositor has at risk in KSF.

I urge forum members to continue posting facts and informed opinions, to politely challenge assumptions and generally keep up the flow of information.


Nice post, DonaldC.

  • ng
  • 11/10/08 31/12/20
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 20/01/2009 - 22:08

Nice post, DonaldC.


that is priceless coming from you

  • conned
  • 13/10/08 n/a (free)
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 20/01/2009 - 12:07

You look to me like one of the worst offenders in this forum.

I am not into chat so don't come here often. When I do I often see you pushing your own position and disrespectfully discrediting & trivialising the views of others by your clever manipulation of words just like a politican.

Most members appear to have abandoned this have your say unmoderated chat forum.. For more relevant information I now visit the public forum.


Time Gentlemen Please

  • bellyup
  • 10/10/08 09/01/10
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Tue, 20/01/2009 - 13:30

Time wasted bickering is time that could be spent on forwarding our cause ,Time Gentlemen Please.


that is priceless coming from you

  • Anonymous
  • Offline
  • Tue, 20/01/2009 - 13:01

You'll understand then why I am going to refrain from replying to you.


Text search, forum structure

  • ng
  • 11/10/08 31/12/20
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Mon, 19/01/2009 - 15:29

I've already commented elsewhere on the "bickering" issue. Agree with the "search tool" needed - originally we used Google, but now can't because the forum site is not public (so Google can't "see" it.) Reason for making it non-public: too much bickering and general crap in the forums!

So, I fully accept some improvements are needed. I am planning to add a "title search" very soon (similar to the one on the public site). It's limited to titles of original posts, not comments (for technical reasons, due to the way that data is organised) but a lot better than nothing. I will aim to improve it with full text searching, both of posts and their comments.

Not sure if I agree with "too many forums", but very open to input on that. I would suggest a related issue might be people putting posts in the right places.

Don't forget the "notifications / subscriptions" feature, which allows you to receive email when posts are made in particular forums, by particular authors, and so on.


Notifications/how to receive an email when a certain user posts

  • C_south_africa
  • 10/10/08 31/05/09
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 21/01/2009 - 19:28

Please someone tell me how to use this. I have been into My Account and tried to set it up so that I receive a mail only when certain people post a message on the Forum, but the method eludes me - perhaps I am just looking in the wrong place, or simply tired.

I'd certainly appreciate some help on this........ simple steps please........


How to use notifications/subscriptions

  • ng
  • 11/10/08 31/12/20
  • a depositor
  • Offline
  • Wed, 21/01/2009 - 19:46

I will post a blog entry on this shortly.


How to use notifications/subscriptions

  • ng
  • 11/10/08 31/12/20
  • a depositor
  • Offline