Summary for the proles here.
Para 31 id interesting: "Our understanding is that, during the review period, the FSA’s approach to liquidity reflected a presumption that, in the event of a crisis like that experienced in August 2007, general market liquidity provided by the Bank of England would be increased and, in extremis, liquidity would be provided for systemically important institutions."
It seems that the FSA assumed that liquidity risk was not a risk because the Bank of England would step in and provide liquidity. It was a shame that nobody told the Bank of England. perhaps the Prime Minister should have told them when he split the responsiblity for bank supervision. Then again, perhaps the FSA should have asked the Bank of England what they would do, before they made any assumptions.
"Have you met the cretins we have in Westminster? Do you think we can be worse than that?" --- Nigel Farage
|
|
|
|
|
Wednesday, 26 March 2008
Monday, 17 March 2008
OK It was a bit of a story
Look how quickly they handled that. One weekend and it is gone, probelm solved, bad assets find a new owner, and as for the staff and directors - who knows? The good ones will keep their jobs, the bad ones will find their own level. Free markets are great.
Look and learn, Mr Brown.
Look and learn, Mr Brown.
Saturday, 15 March 2008
Bear Sterns looking exposed
Allegedly. Reproduced here because its a great headline, even if it isn't much of a story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)