I've been thinking a lot about this and at this stage I agree with ORA on this one. But with everything this government has done regarding the banks the devil is in the detail.
The good thing about this NAMA is that it takes the workout of the bad loans out of the hands of the bankers that granted the loans in the first place. This is very important. Ideally they will employ a team of workout experts for this purpose - but I have no faith that they will. I am also scared of political interference in NAMA's work. Also, I really hope that Anglos loans are put in there (wouldn't surprise me if they are not.)
Whatever discount they pay it looks like it will probably bankrupt the banks (I've not seen the exact numbers of loans per bank versus available capital, but a back of the envelope calculation tells me it will) so they might end up being "nationalised" anyway (inverted commas used because there seems to be some idealogical problem with nationalisation, so they'll come up with another fudge); that being so, it shouldn't matter if they overpay or underpay as the taxpayer will lose on NAMA and gain through the nationalised bank, or vice versa (although that depends on what fudge they come up with - I'd prefer gain through NAMA than gain through a 'nationalised' bank; and I'm pretty certain they overpay).
Bookmarks