Apologies only saw this now.

The answer is yes I think they will.

To go into the detail of what is planned after three austerity budgets and over 14% unemployment is chilling. Its like going from threatening war to actually planning the train timetables.
Are the Irish actually going to take this? Would we?

Basically "its all a bit mad, Ted" to quote Dougal of Father Ted fame.

Dispite selling some of the better assets ( in the UK not Ireland ) which it bought at a discount (so therefore a loss on their orginal price) and claiming a profit on these of 305 million euro it has made a net loss of 1.1 billion after 1.4 billion of loan impairments were added in.

Pretty good going for 20 months hard work I'd say. Its a loss of about 2.75 million euro per working day (400 days or so) despite the "positive" sales in the UK.

Most of the remaining property is in the Irish market. What chance of future positive sales exists there?

I suppose generally it would back up your point Golem on pressures mounting on BoI via the direct financial realisation by the state that NAMA actually isn't working as proposed.

There is a mention of a joint troika and government target of NAMA paying back 7.5 billion by 2013 in the CEOs presentation on p.13.

On the same page they say their will be no fire sales. Its begining to look like Custers last stand here. Except much slower and nobody dies.

Also they have formally announced a domestic mortgage 'non-intervention' intervention where they propose protecting mortgage buyers from negative equitity with a type of subvention that could be written off. The state would take the hit. Max Keisler was a panelist on a TV show here when that same idea was mooted to him without getting into detail and I remember he immediately shouted out that it was a another ( albeit little ) ponzi scheme. He was right it seems judging by the details of it emerging currently.

The theory of NAMA was that it would put Irish toxic property debts into suspended animation while it waited for another speculative boom to create a huge upswing and restore 'values' to levels at such the huge debts could be repaid and the previously toxic assets sold at a profit – to people taking out even bigger loans.

It was never going to work as it is dependent on solving the crash of one hugely leveraged property based ponzi scheme by the creation even more largely leveraged property based ponzi scheme. Its all nuts. The only people who benefit are 'the suits' involved with running it they have massive salaries – many of which were highly involved in creating the first national ponzi scheme.

The discredited mainly FF associated developers also get to retain thier lifestyles as well largely.

If anybody interested – but beware the topic is neverending – this is a good blog on it;

http://namawinelake.wordpress.com/

Some of the properties have been identified involved in NAMA loans including quite a few in the UK

Golem this is also possibly driving UK government policy towards Ireland – ie. we are via NAMA big players in the UK property market)

http://namawinelake.wordpress.com/2011/07/28/revealed-at-last-the-nama-properties-subject-to-enforcement-action/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jul/22/bailout-rescue-euphoria-wanes?INTCMP=SRCH

It's really interesting that the author names these three banks in particular. I wonder how he knows which names to look for among the opt-outs? 😉

That's really interesting. I hadn't noticed that. Given that its those three in particular I am inclined to your view. They are exactly the ones I would have fingered as the exposed.

Thank you for pointing it out.

The water level keeps on rising though…

Are they asset backed or insurance ?

If assets, how long would it take to realise the assets and would 'mark to market' guarantee full value

If insurance backed, is the Ins.Co. good for the money (AIG)

How long does the average saver have to wait between 'credit event' and payout ?

What is the average period between Joe Public experiencing a 'liquidity event' (no access to funds) become a 'solvency event' (due to penalty clauses)

Why anybody trusts the banking system anymore is beyond me, they are all insolvent (they do have some liquidity due to Gov bailout and investor/saver inertia)

If I had any money it would not be in a bank, I would either take the hit from inflation and stash it under my bed, try to hedge with PMs (physical) or lend it to a local enterprise where I could keep an eye on it.

Nogt quite. There is a seperate company. Quite what teh legal and financial arrangement there is between the two I can't say for sure. But they were suposed to be fairly separate.

As for who would guarantee those PO accounts, again I don't know. But I think you are right to sense that there is more to find out .

There is a bigger story but I can't say more at the moment.