Banks, world-wide, aren't willing to loan any[body|thing] money unless they are capable of proving that they don't actually need the loan.
New Coalition government biznovation minister Vince Cable has set out his stall in a speech given yesterday at a business school in London. He pledged to cut the red tape stifling small businesses, and said he would compel banks to lend to SMEs. On the matter of red tape, here's what Mr Cable had to say: I will take a tougher …
Vince is certainly making all the right noises, which is encouraging, for the sort if bankers that a SME would normally encounter, are way out of their depth whenever faced with anything novel and designed to generate greater interest rather than just their "cut" of the action, which is invariably all that the high street banks are interested in and geared for.
Go into any high street branch and enquire of a multi million pound facility, with a valid if somewhat unconventional methodology which guarantees to return quantitatively eased capital immediately, for their further use with no loss, and with it having worked its magic, and continuing to work its magic in the use to which it was put by the SME, and they will struggle to even find anyone prepared to talk about it, let alone provide a meeting/email address with a being enabled to immediately engage to realise it, with such realisation being exactly what the trillions invented and credited to them as a bail out of their own catastrophically failed business ventures, is designed for. Talking to a room full of monkeys reporting to their organ grinders, whenever a simple yes or no to convey to the world from a head honcho able to decide on a proposition is all that is needed, is a waste of time and resources, and a convenient excuse/inconvenient blockage which prevents business and industry and entrepreneurship prospering.
Or am I thinking about another pathetic catastrophe and gang of losers?
Of course, Vince's statement now puts him in the firing line should he receive such a proposal which he would decline to invest in/instruct government banks to credit funds to.
It has normally been the case that those who are responsible for deciding such matters hide themselves away from direct line of communication so that they do not have be seen to be failing to deliver on that which they are positioned to, and pontificate to provide. Does anyone have Vince's direct line of communication ....... which will be the one which he will reply to, rather than the ones which he will ignore?
Yes I agree without your post.
Go to a bank manager now and you get a pimple faced dimwit that doesnt even really know what the bank's products are yet alone how they can be applied to your business.
Secondly, as you correctly stated, unless you can demonstrate that you dont really need the loan, you not going to get it. The only time they seem to offer you any credit is if it is because you have a cashflow issue.
Investments they have no interest in.
Business: "I need to borrow XYZ for lead generation. It will cover the costs of advertising, travel to customers , etc."
Bank: "Of course, no problem. Show me your order book".
Business: "Well my order book is quite empty because I dont have any budget to promote my goods."
Bank: "I'm sorry, come back when you have an order book".
If you want some real sport, just go into a bank and propose a business to make millions which mimics exactly their fractional reserve lending model and see if they don't decline the offer, telling you that it is crooked and something they wouldn't be interested in investing in. :-)
Educate yourself with these little videos .... there are five in number ..... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cr7vG0pnZCc
And then you will realise why the system is running scared of the the power of the internet and the free flow of information for greater intelligence and enlightened and heightened awareness....... and would use conflicts and wars cynically arranged for no good valid reason to stop you finding out about their sinister deeds and dark ways.
A raging mob will not be pleased to listen to their pleas for leniency and mercy when they come a knockin' on their doors, and they know it.
Which makes it all the more remarkable that they make no real change or effort to change their ways or invest/throw cash at those who can change everything for them, which must surely mean that they are either not at all bright or arrogantly evil in their plight ...... which would make them both and doubly afflicted.
As you so rightly say about bankers ......... Wankers.....
a few years ago you all lent far too much money to far too many people creating an unsustainable debt fuelled ecomony which brought the global economy to it's knees. This was bad and you should sit on the naughty step for a very long time, and stop doing all the things that brought about the financial crisis, like loaning out too much cash.
Also whilst you being more fiscally prudent with all of the money we handed over to stop the collapse of the world economy, could you loan more money to people and business.... oh, wait!
You have enjoyed an artificial market funded by the tax payer which has allowed you to recoup and rebuild your cash reserves to such a condition where you are now able to issue bonuses to you highly skilled employees.
Now its time to help get the economy going again. This means pass some of the artificially low interest rates onto the customer that need to borrow money rather that charging them 6 times the rate we charge you. After all you are in effect lending us our own money back and charging us for the privilege.
When a Business comes to you with a request to borrow money so they can expand or invest in their Business plan do not immediately throw it out claiming that's what caused the credit crunch in the first place. It wasn't. The credit crunch was caused by Banks inventing things to sell that was worthless. Junk Bonds ring any bells.
Also please cut the interest rates of your credit cards, overdrafts and banking charges. After all it time you started to support the economy that you nearly destroyed.
A tax payer
The banks got into real trouble for either lending money and then instantly parcelling out the risk to other people, so they basically didn't care if the loans were paid back or not, or bought said risk in - not knowing exactly what they were getting.
What politicians have been asking the banks to do, is to lend to known customers. There's a whole different quality of risk involved in that. This means the banks going back to doing the old, boring, low-margin kind of business, that doesn't pay out large enough bonuses to fund Ferraris, coke and hookers - but does keep the economy turning over.
Admittedly government at the same time was also trying to get banks to shore up their balance sheets, and these two are incompatible - but there's no contradiction in saying stay out of the market for hideously complicated debt instruments that you clearly don't understand, while doing the basic job that you do.
Seriously though, politician making sense? Respect due.
The banks are going to fight him like mad f***ers over this. I await the banks' response with interest. Though in the same way I'm 'interested' in what Steve Ballmer is going to say next...
(Even though we all know this is all just a big distraction while the other half of the coalition privatise the Post Office).
This is hardly fair.
For a start there is a difference between consumer lending where they really did very little due dilligence and money lending is free and easy and business financing where they take time to check out business plans but for years its been impossible to get any credit.
There are bank loans which are available where the bank is only exposed to something like 20% of liability. If the loan defaults, the government will foot most the bill. They been around since before the financial collapse but the banks STILL didn't provide loans.
How there seems to be some commentards denying the banks had anything to do with the problems us small people are having now.
Is this a conspiracy of just trolls?
I'm not sure.
Next it will be Mandy had nothing to do with the DEB.
And Tony Blair didn't send us to war in IRAQ that was George W.
And the credit crunch was cause by terrorist/immigrants/the Tory/lib Dem coalition.
Also notice an increase in advertising by new-old Labour especially on IT websites
Just an observation
This post has been deleted by a moderator
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021