Here's a new thread on RBS after deciding that the old ones were looking a bit worn...
This will undoutedly be a year of change for the UK banking sector - http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703580904574638312022446986.html
Will this institution survive the perils of near nationalisation and rebound or will the government ownership well and truly scupper it?
I seek to apply the fundamental principles of surfing to the capital markets...
Answering my own question on the other thread, I now see the apparent explanation for the 10% jump today is a rating upgrade from analysts at Exane BNP Paribas.... http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKLDE6031ME20100104
"For most of 2009, we regarded RBS as unattractive in both relative and absolute terms," Exane says in a research note.
"However, in our view, following a sharp decline in the share price since the end of August and beneficial revisions to the terms for its participation in the UK government's Asst Protection Scheme, the valuation case has become highly attractive."
Amazing that a single analyst can have such an impact. Why on earth do people think he knows what he's talking about?
I'm just picking up an old thread, as my comment isn't substantial enough to justify a new one....
....but I am struck by the mea culpa admission yesterday that:
The Royal Bank of Scotland is facing millions of pounds of compensation claims after its chief executive admitted that the bank had failed to invest properly in IT for decades
The reason I am struck by this is that, 20 years ago, I used to work for NatWest and knew several of the senior divisional IT people very well........ and I distinctly recall being told that NatWest had c. 13 different major computer systems, which had never been integrated with one another and many of which were developed in-house in the 1970s.
Since those conversations, two decades have passed and RBS has bought both NatWest and ABN Amro......and it would appear from McEwan's comments that things are very much the same in terms of the IT organisation as they were back then - except that they presumably have even more systems that don't talk to each other!
Those of you who are more IT literate than I am may perhaps be able to guesstimate the cost of bringing such a mish-mash up to scratch?
ee
Hi ee,
Agree your comments re indifferent IT systems at the clearers (Lloyds in my case).
Wasn't it Santamder's Botin who - in an unguarded moment, when asked how he expected to be able to make money from his UK acquisitions/rescues (Alliance and Leicester etc) - said that British banks suffered from indifferent management and poor IT systems and Santander could improve both ?
The inadequacies of management have been exposed for all to see, I guess it's time for 'the second shoe' to drop....
ATB
Such upgrades are a major nightmare to do as a live upgrade: technically tricky, hard to get good staff to work on that sort of thing, and a fossilised incumbent culture to fight against. Frankly it might be cheaper just to close the business down and transfer the customers to better run existing or new banks. Customers should help by moving their accounts. Having systems that work is core functionality for a bank!
