Anglo Billions

[Billsthoughts]

Can anyone tell me what all the money is being spent on?

[dahamsta]

Uh, millions? Hello?

[Macy]

Can anyone tell me what all the money is being spent on?
The billions are effectively hush money.

[passinginterest]

The Euromillions?

[Billsthoughts]

so nobody knows?

[Dodge]

so nobody knows?

Nope, and 2 or 3 tribunals down the road, in say 2021, thats the conclusion that will be formally reached.

Taoiseach John and Finance Minister Edward will be rattled but the Greens/Raving Looneys coalition will survive

[Mr A]

According to my understanding, it largely covers Anglo's losses on throwing out ridiculous loans all over the place. To throw out the loans they had to borrow the money themselves elsewhere,and just because the development loans won't in many cases be paid doesn't mean their own loans are gone. And since the state now owns Anglo that means we own the debts.

Which is a bad thing.

[Billsthoughts]

Thanks. So we wouldnt be paying so much if we hadnt taken them over? Or would the guarantee have meant we would? If not why is Brian Lenihan not be crucified for the error in nationalising them?

I just find the figures mental. With that amount of money spent on meaningful projects we could have a great country!

[hula4]

so if the government never took ownership of anglo what would have happened if anglo simply could not play back their loans?

[pineapple stu]

I suppose the ultimate situation would have been going to withdraw money and being told Anglo didn't have it because they were still waiting on the developers to pay them back. So potentially, goodbye life savings.

[Fr Damo]

Watch RTE1 @ 9.35 Monday night.

Apparently Seanie rang BOI (B Goggin) on the 29th sept & told him he was skint and might not be able to open the next day. He asked BOI to take Anglo over. BOI sat on it and then rang AIB to let them know what had taken place. Between them they decided to call B Lenihan and suggested the only way to avoid a flight of capital from depositors was gauarntee the whole lot of them and for the Government to take on the Assets and Liabilities of Anglo. The trouble is nobody bothered with the duedilegence!

[Spudulika]

Brian Lenihan is not being strung up because he's sick, and he's been left in his position because his illness suits the needs of the ruling regime, this regime includes the "developers" and financiers who have lined politicos pockets for decades.

Back when this guarantee was announced I called David McWilliams and asked what was the story, he said it would bring about the ruination of the country in the form being agreed, that it would end up being a black hole where money would disappear and never be found again. If anyone read Shane Ross' most recent article in the Indo it's obviously clear as to what's going on, not to mention the mollycoddling Alan Dukes got on Prime Time last week. The only solution is to fold up Anglo, do a deal with the creditors and move on, AIB is next to fall and BOI is going to be on rocky ground. When the recent crisis hit in Russia the government gave a clear offer, we'll bail you out but will take over control of the bank - suddenly banks sobered up and got moving, or else took up the offer, were brought under the control of larger (read Putin) banks or just went out of business. Yet the country moves on and keeps going. It won't happen in Ireland as there are too many worms in the can to come out!

[Billsthoughts]

Appreciate Brian Lenihan is sick but you can be compassionate to the guy and still point out when he seems to have made a complete error on something. A lot of the papers seem to still push the line that he is a potential/the actual taoiseach!

The solution now would seem to be to cut deals with the creditors. Offer them smaller percentage of what is owed. Not sure why this isnt on the agenda other than the cloud of mystery surrounding the money being spent in the first place. Dont see how this will effect our reputation as the country seems to be heading for bankruptcy anyways the way things are going.

the figures do put the recent private sector/public sector debate into context. Seems to have been a complete red herring.

[Spudulika]

Billsthoughts, I think Brian Lenihan is a decent skin (I prefer his brother as he's a sports freak and great company, as well as a LOI fan), and I agree with you, he shouldn't be sheltered from criticism because of his illness. It's tradition that the Minister for Finance will be in line to take over when the Taoiseach steps down (or is eliminated as Bertie did to Albert), though I never would have put him in the frame, even before he got sick. He shouldn't be in the position he's in now, a specialist in finance or diplomat is needed, though leaving him there suits the ruling cabal, if he goes there would be chaos. Let Anglo go to the wall, it's the only sensible thing, investment will ebb and flow as it's always done - however the government are stating that Anglo is Ireland, they keep pushing this line that if it goes so does credibility in Ireland Inc., but this is nonsense (examples are easy to find - Finland, Sweden). It will run to over 40billion and we'll still have more banks to bail out, meanwhile ghost estates are left everywhere, zombie hotels lie idle and the media are told to keep the masses occupied, it'll never change.

[bennocelt]

The only solution is to fold up Anglo, do a deal with the creditors and move on, AIB is next to fall and BOI is going to be on rocky ground. When the recent crisis hit in Russia the government gave a clear offer, we'll bail you out but will take over control of the bank - suddenly banks sobered up and got moving, or else took up the offer, were brought under the control of larger (read Putin) banks or just went out of business. Yet the country moves on and keeps going. It won't happen in Ireland as there are too many worms in the can to come out!

Explain please, you seem to know the score. Tx:)
(a worried AIB account/pension holder!!!)

[dahamsta]

Lads, you lost me, why is Lenihan's illness even a factor in this thread? If Lenihan isn't up to the job then he should either resign or be fired, simple as. Until that happens, can we concentrate on the actual Current Affair in the title?

[Dodge]

Npt to mention the fact that he wasn't exactly doing hard labour as it is. He can easily do msot of his job from home

[osarusan]

Lads, you lost me, why is Lenihan's illness even a factor in this thread? If Lenihan isn't up to the job then he should either resign or be fired, simple as. Until that happens, can we concentrate on the actual Current Affair in the title?

I think the point being made though, was that even though you are completely correct in saying that his illness shouldn't be a factor in the issue (or this thread), it might be possible that FF are leaving him in there despite his illness (or because of his illness) because they feel a sick man will get an easier ride in the media.

So even though FF might wonder if he's the best man in charge of the Anglo Millions, he's a good public face for it.

[Spudulika]

Lads, you lost me, why is Lenihan's illness even a factor in this thread? If Lenihan isn't up to the job then he should either resign or be fired, simple as. Until that happens, can we concentrate on the actual Current Affair in the title?

Dahamsta, it's Minister Lenihan who's "rescued" the bank, and he's just not up to the job, hence his inclusion in the thread, his illness is keeping him in the job - sorry, but it cannot be discounted from the equation, if somebody performing as poorly as he has been was not sick he'd have been put out on his ear, however it shows his lack of integrity that he won't resign, he's just not up to the task of making and taking hard decisions. edit: Osarusan answered far better than I ever could have to the question posed.

Bennocelt, I've money tied up with AIB too and the only thing I know for sure is that they will come to the government to ask for support - this goes down to a number of seriously toxic loans given out, including a 150million loan to buy a stretch of coastline which changed jurisdiction - in a semi-legal sense - in Abkhazia. I have only the hard copy version of this in the Moscow News (newspaper) from 2008 where 2 Irish developers (one I'd never heard of and the Quinn East group) got a loan from AIB to go in with two preferred clients of A-1 Financial Corporation (they took 10% of the amount from Alfa Bank, part of A-1) and the whole deal blew up, pardon the pun, with the Russia-Georgia war, and rights to the land lost. I believe that AIB are in a quite okay position, despite the number of defaults on domestic mortgages they've had, however they will still need funding. One thing is for sure, they won't be let fail as they are economically strong and the scale of losses will not affect them as bad as Anglo or BOI.

[Poor Student]

Spudulika, the scale of losses is likely to affect AIB more than BOI. AIB have taken larger haircuts than BOI on their NAMA transfers and have a larger amount to raise to reach the new capital adequacy ratios. BOI have had their restructure plan rubber stamped by the EU and have gone through a rights issue and look to have avoided majority state ownership. AIB on the other hand still need to have their plans agreed with the EU Commission and still have to undergo a massive assets disposal to attempt plug as much of €7bn plus gap as possible.

[osarusan]

Also, and apologies if it's off-topic, but I have a question on the 'haircuts' demanded by NAMA.

It seems to me that most banks expected NAMA to request discounts of 28% (or close to it) but NAMA looked for discounts of up to 50% from some banks, including Anglo. This was publicised at the time as a sign of how serious NAMA were about the task in front of them.

But as I understand it, the amount the banks needed was calculated (at least partly) on the understanding that they would be asked for a 28% 'haircut', so by asking for 50%, all that happens is that they need to be recapitalised again later, to make up the funds shortfall caused by the extra 20% that NAMA asked for.

So was NAMA asking for 50% just for show?

Or am I drastically reducing the complexity of the NAMA deals?

[Billsthoughts]

doc on rte at moment about it. not great tho a lot of the same old media talking heads.

[dahamsta]

TBH I think by making his health a factor in the debate here, you're just perpetuating the myth. Concentrate on the economics, they damn him to hell. Now I'm doing it though, so I won't comment any more on it.

Can I change the title to billions yet? I mean millions, seriously, for feck's sake like...

[Mr A]

Please do so!

And you've one more post for 11000 by the way, better make it a good one!

[dahamsta]

Fanny.

[Aberdonian Stu]

Ah I was going to recommend a sliding scale for the title over the next few days to Thousands, Hundreds, Guineas, Shillings, Farthings.

[Mr A]

Fanny.

Link, picture or reference or it didn't happen.

[Fr Damo]

Dahamsta, it's Minister Lenihan who's "rescued" the bank, and he's just not up to the job, hence his inclusion in the thread, his illness is keeping him in the job - sorry, but it cannot be discounted from the equation, if somebody performing as poorly as he has been was not sick he'd have been put out on his ear, however it shows his lack of integrity that he won't resign, he's just not up to the task of making and taking hard decisions. edit: Osarusan answered far better than I ever could have to the question posed.

Bennocelt, I've money tied up with AIB too and the only thing I know for sure is that they will come to the government to ask for support - this goes down to a number of seriously toxic loans given out, including a 150million loan to buy a stretch of coastline which changed jurisdiction - in a semi-legal sense - in Abkhazia. I have only the hard copy version of this in the Moscow News (newspaper) from 2008 where 2 Irish developers (one I'd never heard of and the Quinn East group) got a loan from AIB to go in with two preferred clients of A-1 Financial Corporation (they took 10% of the amount from Alfa Bank, part of A-1) and the whole deal blew up, pardon the pun, with the Russia-Georgia war, and rights to the land lost. I believe that AIB are in a quite okay position, despite the number of defaults on domestic mortgages they've had, however they will still need funding. One thing is for sure, they won't be let fail as they are economically strong and the scale of losses will not affect them as bad as Anglo or BOI.

With every % discount applied on the bad loans, X amount goes into that banks balance sheet as a write down and ultimatly a loss. The two are in intrinsically linked.

The fear is NAMA have reconginised that to write down the bad loans to a more realictic level would mean an even bigger bailout at or equity swap for the government. By fudging the decesion on land values/developments, NAMA and the Government have postponed this countries insolvency - that's all.

As an advocate of Brian Lenihan's intellect and his integrety 12 months ago, I admit I was wrong. Many of you were correct.

[Macy]

TBH I think by making his health a factor in the debate here, you're just perpetuating the myth. Concentrate on the economics, they damn him to hell. Now I'm doing it though, so I won't comment any more on it.
I believe it is an issue, and that it's inevitable that decent people go easy on people suffering from Cancer, whatever spin he and the opposition and media put on it. We need someone to take the long term view and we need the opposition and media to being after someone who made, at best, poor decisions.

I see Government bonds are up over 6% now, and there's a possibility us being the next Greece is happening. I'm not that up in the bond markets, but it looks bad to me - can any of the more educated in the bond markets expand or you too busy emptying your bank accounts? Might be the IMF/ECB's choice what to do with Anglo soon, even more so than now.

[Fr Damo]

Markets are guided by sentiment both on the up and way down - The cold hard facts however are becoming obvious to all, especially when we have articles in the FT saying technically we are broke. How long more will the governemnts gurarentee apease (foreign) depositors in the irish banks and more importantly lenders to the same inistitutions?

If only it was one bank who brought down the country (as per the Article last week)

[Lim till i die]

But as I understand it, the amount the banks needed was calculated (at least partly) on the understanding that they would be asked for a 28% 'haircut', so by asking for 50%, all that happens is that they need to be recapitalised again later, to make up the funds shortfall caused by the extra 20% that NAMA asked for.

So was NAMA asking for 50% just for show?

Or am I drastically reducing the complexity of the NAMA deals?

http://content.paulnixon.org/images/content/this-is-relevant-to-my-interests.jpg

[Fr Damo]

NIB have gone to ECB for 4billon to tide them over (using the governments guaranatee) and not a word about it.

We have a picture of Callaly in a sports car, and the Irish team in the Indo,& a national debate on Joe Duffy about some village idiot dancing on Haugheys grave on youtube while reading from the constitution.

Sean O Rourke had the hack from the FT who writes the Lex column basically saying the Irish Governement have lost international credability - Noonan saying general election in March.

Ian Dempsey want's to start a petition to get Clown to give us a state of the nation address - does anyone give a ****?

Wie ist Screwed.

[Spudulika]

Jesus Fr Damo, I checked out the info - NIB are wobbling but I think it's down to their parent bank cutting back, as well as the mortgage market having problems.

This whole work for dole scheme was actually an FG effort and theirs was based on the current/old Russian model, but it's been perverted in the FF structure to serve a different purpose, namely intimidate those on the dole and cut back on outlay on support services. Is it a surprise that when they've been cutting back on caregivers, education assistants etc that now they come up with this?

Joe Duffy has no credibility (listening on Monday I think it was I wanted to reach through the radio and smack the man), the FT is one of the most bought and paid for outfits going (it's like basing your business on Standard and Poors), while the government haven't a clue of how to gain the respect of the people, then again, they don't care. If Noonan is right, next March there'll be a few bones thrown to the masses and FF will get back in with Labour as partners (the Greens will disappear and rightly so, they're self righteous, fake idiots who think that opening a nuclear waste processing and power plants in Ireland are the solution to our woes).

[dahamsta]

Gov.ie has taken a very short list of options for Anglo, and picked the worst by a country mile (http://www.moneyguideireland.com/anglo-irish-bank-to-be-split.html).

Could somebody make a hat for Brian and make him sit in the corner for a while?

http://lauriekendrick.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/dunce-hat.jpg

[Mr A]

Won't a bank that only has deposits just lose money? Why not use that so called good bank to get lending to business flowing again?

This doesn't make any sense to me to be honest.

Edit: Unless it's a tactic- separate them, then nuke the bad one as without doing the former you can't burn the bondhonders without also burning the depositors?

[Mr A]

IrishEconomy.ie (http://www.irisheconomy.ie/) answers my question:


A quick reaction. That the new bank isn’t making lending is a good thing. The bank didn’t have the capacity to transform itself into a small business lender or the other proposals that the management were floating. It will presumably need less money to be capitalised as a pure deposit-funding bank.

Fair enough I guess.

[Spudulika]

Unbelievable and sickening, hearing Lenihan saying "the markets have remained open to Ireland.....we've had lenders lining up to lend.....we're oversubscribed with interested lenders." OF COURSE WE ARE YOU CRETIN!!!! Why wouldn't they when we're paying more interest than Greece, when we've become the moneymaker for the lowest end of the market. We're the laughing stock of the World at this stage, if the USA cannot help themselves and improve their economy by bailing out a stronger bank, we're completely csrewed! The government are a disgrace, a joke and we're going to bankrupt ourselves! The bond markets are going to nail us!

[juan]

I am proposing an ambitious takeover of Anglo for a euro and a €5 HMV voucher.

[Spudulika]

I am proposing an ambitious takeover of Anglo for a euro and a €5 HMV voucher.

I don't think they could afford the 6quid to give you control juan! I'm desperately looking for a link (I got a circular email that is a page capture from a website) regarding the cutbacks in Anglo, it's like something out of a fantasy novel.

[Fr Damo]

Ireland now 29th in a competitive survey dragged down 4 places by the state of the banking system. We were last of 139 countries, behind Greece and Iceland in banking catagory!

http://www.rte.ie/business/2010/0909/competitiveness.html

[OneRedArmy]

I don't believe the OPs question has actually been answered yet (where is the money invested in Anglo going).

Apologies for over-simplfying, but the answer to this is that Anglo are:
1) selling a large number of its loans to NAMA at a value way below the amount actually lent to the customer originally (the "haircut"). This crystallises an actual loss.
2) reducing the estimate of how much customers who loans aren't transferring to NAMA will eventually pay back (bad debt "provision"). Harder to estimate than 1), but still creates a hole in the accounts that needs to be filled.

Banks are required to hold a certain amount of cash (or near cash equivalents) to ensure its depositors and bondholders can get paid ("capital"). Because of one and two, and because the percentage of minimum capital banks must hold has been increased by regulatory bodies as a result of the crisis, the Government has been forced to inject money to ensure Anglo's capital ratios are maintained and that ultimately bondholders AND depositors can be assured of getting their money back.

If Anglo was left without Government assistance (i.e. if the guarantee hadn't been given), depositors and bondholders would lose money, in all probability the bulk of their investment.

The current thinking seems to be that Anglo (and INBS) should have been let go back in 2008, with a selective guarantee of deposits, but allowing bondholders (international pension funds and banks in the main) to suffer the loss. Simulataneously, AIB and BoI should either have been nationalised or guaranteed to assuage the international finance community and maintain confidence that Ireland isn't a "serial defaulter" and its Government bonds can be trusted.

I see two problems with this
1) Hindsight is 20/20.
2) I'm not aware of any large bank being allowed to fail and bondholders being stiffed outside of Lehman's. To say that didn't go well would be a monumental understatement. So for those who say we should have let Anglo go, the only example we have of that taking place was a catastrophic failure and generally now acknowledged as the wrong decision. Those people who claim that there would be no associated cost in terms of Goverment debt to letting Anglo go are fooling themselves. Its almost undeniable that the price of Government debt would have shot up, and its highly possible the market would not have bought our debt at any price because we simply could not be trusted ("the Irish Government let Anglo go, why should we believe they'll pay their own debt back".

I must admit I'm hugely frustrated, not just by the clowns who run the system, but equally by the Joe Duffy brigade who don't have a notion about what they are talking about yet still think they have the whole thing cracked.

My own view, which I've repeatedly stated, is that the cost the country will ultimately bear for the financial crisis is completely and utterly fixed and was pretty much inevitable post-2005/6. i.e. regardless of what actions the Government took, the financial cost would be the same. We need to focus on why this was allowed to happen, i.e. the events in the 5 odd years leading up to this, yet all the media attention is about how we reacted to a situation that was a fait accompli. Government overstimulation of the property market, planning corruption, complete and absolute regulatory failure, lemming-like banking sector.........

Maybe more controversially, I reckon the reason Joe Public, led by the medja,is focusing on the response to the pre-ordained outcome, is that they don't want to look themselves in the mirror and accept that the writing was on the wall, we knew about the FF corruption, we knew it was all a little too rosy, yet a significant percentage of the population decided to re-elect the Government.

The truth hurts.

Meanwhile, I don't see any real sense that in 30 years the same thing couldn't happen again.

Depressing.

[Billsthoughts]

" Its almost undeniable that the price of Government debt would have shot up, and its highly possible the market would not have bought our debt at any price because we simply could not be trusted ("the Irish Government let Anglo go, why should we believe they'll pay their own debt back"."

Why was the Irish Government beholden to a private banks(as it was before it was nationalised) debts?

[Macy]

The current thinking seems to be that Anglo (and INBS) should have been let go back in 2008, with a selective guarantee of deposits, but allowing bondholders (international pension funds and banks in the main) to suffer the loss. Simulataneously, AIB and BoI should either have been nationalised or guaranteed to assuage the international finance community and maintain confidence that Ireland isn't a "serial defaulter" and its Government bonds can be trusted.

I see two problems with this
1) Hindsight is 20/20.
2) I'm not aware of any large bank being allowed to fail and bondholders being stiffed outside of Lehman's. To say that didn't go well would be a monumental understatement. So for those who say we should have let Anglo go, the only example we have of that taking place was a catastrophic failure and generally now acknowledged as the wrong decision. Those people who claim that there would be no associated cost in terms of Goverment debt to letting Anglo go are fooling themselves. Its almost undeniable that the price of Government debt would have shot up, and its highly possible the market would not have bought our debt at any price because we simply could not be trusted ("the Irish Government let Anglo go, why should we believe they'll pay their own debt back".

Even if the course taken was the best option (I remain to be convinced), the Government allowed itself to be bounced into the guarantee without truly assessing the options and/or ignoring advice. Could they not have suspended trading in Anglo shares whilst they considered options which could've included a negotiated a lower percentage to bondholders?


My own view, which I've repeatedly stated, is that the cost the country will ultimately bear for the financial crisis is completely and utterly fixed and was pretty much inevitable post-2005/6. i.e. regardless of what actions the Government took, the financial cost would be the same. We need to focus on why this was allowed to happen, i.e. the events in the 5 odd years leading up to this, yet all the media attention is about how we reacted to a situation that was a fait accompli. Government overstimulation of the property market, planning corruption, complete and absolute regulatory failure, lemming-like banking sector.........

Maybe more controversially, I reckon the reason Joe Public, led by the medja,is focusing on the response to the pre-ordained outcome, is that they don't want to look themselves in the mirror and accept that the writing was on the wall, we knew about the FF corruption, we knew it was all a little too rosy, yet a significant percentage of the population decided to re-elect the Government.

The truth hurts.

Meanwhile, I don't see any real sense that in 30 years the same thing couldn't happen again.

Depressing.
I wouldn't disagree with the sentiment, but I hope (pray?) the public are seeing through that, given the low ratings the Government are getting at the moment. They continue to focus on "the hard decisions" and stating that's why they are unpopular, but aren't they being punished for causing the mess too? Why would the architect of those supposed hard decisions be lauded at the same time as his party is bombing?

However, this is where I don't mind the focus on the decisions taken post crash - Lenihan has been bounced into (poor) decisions. I've no idea why the media (in particular) and public seem to see him as some great politician and hope for the future. There's very little evidence that he's any different to the rest of the Government members.

I guess the next election will show whether the electorate are as stupid as so many election outcomes since the foundation of the state make them look...

[OneRedArmy]

" Its almost undeniable that the price of Government debt would have shot up, and its highly possible the market would not have bought our debt at any price because we simply could not be trusted ("the Irish Government let Anglo go, why should we believe they'll pay their own debt back"."

Why was the Irish Government beholden to a private banks(as it was before it was nationalised) debts?Because in developed countries that participate in international debt markets Governments are generally expected to stand behind their internationally active banks. This is backed up by decades, nay centuries of history.

Not to say I necessarily agree with this expectation, but as someone with over a decade's experience in international banking markets, it is undeniable that its an expectation.

The next question that needs to be asked is, given that expectation, which Government knew, should we not have taken better care to ensure that banks remained solvent?

[bennocelt]

If Anglo was left without Government assistance (i.e. if the guarantee hadn't been given), depositors and bondholders would lose money, in all probability the bulk of their investment.



I see two problems with this
1) Hindsight is 20/20.

Maybe more controversially, I reckon the reason Joe Public, led by the medja,is focusing on the response to the pre-ordained outcome, is that they don't want to look themselves in the mirror and accept that the writing was on the wall, we knew about the FF corruption, we knew it was all a little too rosy, yet a significant percentage of the population decided to re-elect the Government.



Depressing.

But why should tax payers have to bail out what private bond holders get upto!!!!!!

50-50 Hindsight - no, its called the blindingly obvious that it would go balls up - come on, its a FF run country!!!!:rolleyes:

And does that did/never voted for FF (or FG) isnt a reason why we should all suffer their mistakes

[OneRedArmy]

But why should tax payers have to bail out what private bond holders get upto!!!!!!The simple answer is that they shouldn't, but if they don't, theyshould be willing to accept significantly higher mortgage and other borrowing costs (and I mean significant) as a lower cost of finance is the indirect consequence of an implied Government guarantee.

[dahamsta]

Wasn't Lehman allowed to die? I'm pretty sure there's as much precedent for allowing backs to collapse as there is for propping them up.

[osarusan]

Wasn't Lehman allowed to die? I'm pretty sure there's as much precedent for allowing backs to collapse as there is for propping them up.
it was.



2) I'm not aware of any large bank being allowed to fail and bondholders being stiffed outside of Lehman's. To say that didn't go well would be a monumental understatement.

[bennocelt]

The simple answer is that they shouldn't, but if they don't, theyshould be willing to accept significantly higher mortgage and other borrowing costs (and I mean significant) as a lower cost of finance is the indirect consequence of an implied Government guarantee.

Not if you dont have a mortgage??????

[osarusan]

Not if you dont have a mortgage??????

Then, if my understanding of the situation is correct, in the event of the government failing to stand by a collapsing bank, you'd be less affected by one of the rising banking costs that ensued as foreign banks charged the Irish banks more for lending. But people who don't have a mortgage would be a minority, and if the governernment made a policy of not intervening to aid its banks, that minority would be shrinking pretty rapidly I'd say.