Perhaps as a method of protest at the actions of AIB ect for their preferential treatment of ZOE to the detriment of the wider public interest, people should look at removing their cash and placing it into a more ethical better run institution?

The point being an Irish or Finnish Headquartered business will look more favourably on their home location than a foreign one. The HQ alone gives serious levels of employment and benefits to the home country.

My problem with FDI is it seems to be fleeting with a lifespan of 10 to 20 years sometimes less. I hope your employer will be more permanent.

My personal belief is this country focused too much on FDI to the detriment of creating world class Irish businesses exporting round the world (and yes many of the shareholders may be foreign but the business itself would be Irish). The Scandanavians have done a pretty good job creating world class businesses.

As for your stats on exports I’m more interested in the prospect for recovery for if our exports have held up well (i.e were more recession proof) where will the recovery come from?

As for Zoe, the idea of examinership is for businesses with a realistic chance of turning around and repaying its creditors. In the case of Goodman their problems came from outside their core business - they started investing in Food Industries and got hit by loss of export credits for Iraq among other things. Their main business was sound and the banks in the end got a lot of their money back. I think they might even have taken a quasi equity stake if I remember rightly.

If you bring in the wider public interest (i.e non creditors) then the argument could be made it is right for the creditors to be at a loss if society in general gains. Capitalism doesn’t work that way and if we do go down that road it will make it harder for businesses to get credit. If we’re trying not to spook the international credit markets and investors this won’t be the way to do it.

Are you certain that Nokia is Finnish? I thought I read here a few weeks ago that most of the shareholders of Nokia were not Finnish? Just as most of the shareholders of CRH are not Irish. Maybe, I read it wrong.

Anyway, I fail to see the relevance of the ethnic composition of the owners or shareholders of a company. I myself work for an American-owned company. This is 2009, not 1939. Nearly all large companies are now multi-national, both in their ownership and their shareholdings. What is much more important is how manufacturing output is performing, not who owns it. As I said earlier, manufacturing is down 25% so far in 2009 in Finland, down 1% in Ireland. That’s really all that matters.

Re the main subject of this thread, the Zoe court case. The torrent of anti-Zoe posts are beginning to ressemble a lynch mob. I have no connection with Zoe, in fact I never heard of them until I read this thread. But, it looks as if all they are doing is trying to buy more time in the hope that the economy in general and their sector in particular will upturn in the next few years. I don’t think that is uncommon. I don’t think that is unrealistic.

However, its for the judge to decide in accordance with the law. I have every confidence that he will do that. A lot of the posters clearly will not accept the judge’s decision if it doesn’t go the way they want. In fact, most of them would deny Zoe the right to take their case to court at all. Perhaps, before any business takes their case to court, it should first be judged upon by a committee of UCD lecturers.

I have no idea what the judge will decide, and frankly I don’t care that much. But, all I know is this. If he comes down against Zoe, he’ll be considered the greatest thing since sliced bread by most of the posters here. If he comes down in favour of Zoe, he’ll be the object of vituperative attacks by the same posters on a Richter scale of 10 (gombeen man, FF hack, corrupt gobshite etc etc). Whether or not his decision was in accordance with the law won’t matter a toss.

http://www.beauchamps.ie/index.php/news/press/property_developer_fails_in_company_rescue_bid/538

Our manufacturing employment prospects seems to depend on foreign companies.

The fact is a creditor is not being paid according to an agreed schedule and Zoe are showing no signs of paying up or even that they intend to pay up. In all these reports we haven’t seen any commitment from Zoe that they ever intend to pay ACC.

Either Ireland is a safe place for companies to invest in where rights are respected or its not…. For the court to go against ACC when Zoe are openly giving them the finger would send out a very clear signal that commercial law in Ireland is a shambles. That creditors have no rights.

Read the reports… This isn’t a plan to turn a company around, It is just not paying people for a few years. When Zoe are using projected dividends from share purchases to cobble together the 40M income from 1.1B liabilities; its funny….. Divide up the shares between the creditors, Zoe is adding zero value to that process.

I know we can have theories on delaying tactics etc but I really struggle to see how a court can conjure up a judgment in favour of Zoe. They have already lost credibility in accepting the appeal. Even if they reject it and allow Zoe to appeal again to the Supreme Court would in my view cast real doubts on the integrity of the Irish justice system.

Alternative 2 NAMA? Use NAMA wonga to reduce principal on private homes bought between 2004-2007. If that doesn’t win over the locals in MIchael Harve’s Local Watering hole I don’t know what would. And let the banks sort out their own developer related debt prblems and go to the wall if necess. If we are to be paing that 1.5% interest plus/ear on sixti b nama bonds anwa not use it to benefit the man over the few.

That said I think it’s a bogus argument in favour of nama to ask the doubter: ‘what would u do instead?’ Show us the whole of nama on the table and i’ll show mi cards.

@christy
“What is happening is an abuse of process.”
Spot on

They should never have been allowed back into court, and by so doing, the whole court system is on trial not just Zoe.

The last time, there was plenty of hints that it was not going well for Zoe, the judge’s remarks were more biting, this time it is a lot quieter, whether Zoes plan is credible or whether its the judges style…

I dont see the public interest argument… I dont see the argument for Zoe survival if ACC are demanding payment.

Its clear from the article that Zoe is insolvent and can only survive if it does not pay even interest on its debts…

Behind all the bluster, the numbers speak for themselves. The questing facing the judge is does the company have a reasonable prospect of survival.
If we are to take this as can Zoe recover to trade profitably and start to pay back its creditors; the answer has to be no….. Even if we are to take this as can Zoe pay back ACC the answer has to be no…..

All they have shown is that at the very best Zoe in 2 years can pay back some interest on some loans… And thats with extraordinary forbearance from all the banks, except ACC.

ACC are within their rights to demand their original T&C’s are enforced… And I think any objective looking at the numbers would conclude they are right to be worried about their loan. Its up to Zoe to prove they can pay it back and intend to pay it back and they have failed to do so….

If a judge turns down ACC, I would be shocked….

From the article…..
Addressing the effect of a possible rise in interest rates, counsel said rates could be fixed and AIB was offering a rate of 2.7 per cent up to 2014. A rate increase could add up to €14 million to ACC’s debt……

The court heard it was intended that no interest would be paid on Zoe’s debt to Anglo Irish Bank until 2014…..

It is claimed the group will be “balance-sheet” solvent by 2011 with sufficient income of some €40 million from property rents, sales and share dividends to meet interest repayments and provide a surplus of some €20 million in assets over liabilities.

A previous petition was rejected by the High and Supreme Courts on grounds of no evidence to support the group’s claim of a reasonable prospect of survival. If liquidated, the seven companies would have some €1.1 billion in liabilities, the court has heard.

i think 300bps wont be that odd in the future, but as you said, it’ll involve much more stringent covenants, higher equity input, tighter collateral etc etc. But yeah, its probably the starting point rather than the average or normal rate.

Mortgage lending at 200bps+ is already here ex AIB. Some of the UK lenders are offering fixed rates at 300bps at the moment, though this could be as much to discourage new business as anything else.

I think he can go for

“2. Dismiss the argument and rule against Zoe;”

The Public Interest case is an assertion, not proven fact before the Court.

And even if he accepts Shipsey’s assertion it is then open to ACC to appeal on the basis that the judge has overestimated the importance on Zoe to the public interest regardless of arguments for or against NAMA on that basis.

In any event the Judge can rely on Brian Lenihan for guidance.

“However, a spokesman for Finance Minister Brian Lenihan last night insisted the decision would have no impact on NAMA, which will proceed as planned.”

If NAMA is in the Public Interest and if Brian Lenihan’s opinion is that the decision on Zoe would have no impact on NAMA then the decision on Zoe will have no impact on the (Lenihan) view of Public Interest.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/carroll-judgment-threatens-property-market-98561.html

The public interest line advanced by Zoe’s Counsel puts the Justice in a very difficult position. Hee will have to address it in his judgement, becasue, on the basis of the IT’s report, it seems to be a key plank in Zoe’s case. He has four options:
1. Dismiss this public interest argument, but rule for Zoe;
2. Dismiss the argument and rule against Zoe;
3. Accept the argument and rule for Zoe; and
4. Accept the argument but rule against Zoe.

1. or 2. will leave him exposed to being accused of making a political statement. 1. or 3. will leave him open to the accusation that he was got at. And he might find it difficult to square 4.

It is unfortunate that it is only in the Courts that any bit of transparency has emerged about the machinations behid NAMA. It just shows how bad things have got in democratic governance terms when the Courts are being pulled in to make implicit judgements about policy (and when they are the only location where solid information emerges that is needed to inform the policy debate) when the resulting legislation has not yet been enacted.

“@ Greg
that 90,000,000,000 Mongolian tögrögs still wouldn’t buy me a half decent semi-d in Sandymount….”

No. But it’d get you a nice yurt and a couple of yaks, and if Michael O’Leary starts offering flights for €9.99 to Ulaanbaatar, and if Liam Carroll can scrape together the price of a one way ticket, sure in the time it takes you to say NAMA one yurt and a couples of yaks in Mongolia will buy you a house on Shrewsbury Road, and if you put that house into a trust in Jersey with your wife as beneficiary even if the bet goes sour you still have a house on Shrewsbury Road.

At lot of ifs I’ll grant you. But not have as many as Brian the Builder is using.

5.7% is a pretty reasonable answer (using 2000-2007 margins). I think “normal” in the future will be higher 400-500bps over base*, mortgages will probably settle around 200bps over base. If you’re to use secondary market rmbs spreads, there’s a huge distance to go to get to this level.

(*I think this spread would be higher if lenders offered the same terms as the NAMAble loans. In the future, these borrowers will need to offer greater equity/additional collateral/guarantees and valuations will be tighter).

The core point I’m making is 2.7% claimed by Mr Shipsey is not realistic and AIB would be offering Carroll an extra special rate not available to other customers. If AIB were to keep this debt on their own books, it would not be optimal to apply this rate. They’d be better off with a higher rate and forgive some interest owed or accrue it as (theoretically) they can seek to recover interest owed.

A failure to present necessary evidence by an applicant should not be an acceptable excuse for another bite at the cherry. This is doubly the case when the party oopsing the application suffers prejudice as a result

Every day that has passed since the SC rejected their application is a day wasted.

What is happening is an abuse of process

I would say there is a good chance that we are going back to basics under FF. Standing around at the cross roads looking at athletic pursuits maybe the only thing that most of us end up doing. Going back to 1943 living standards is also a possibility.

Still look on the brightside, we still have the GAA and we would be healthier if we were cycling to matches. Moreover, the last time a team did a 4 in a row was in the 1940s. Cmon de Cats

that 90,000,000,000 Mongolian tögrögs still wouldn’t buy me a half decent semi-d in Sandymount….

Everyone I have meet today on the street is mad angry about Ireland Inc
It is rubbing off on me.
Irrational demands!!

Al

thats basically like saying, “i own a car, so when i crash it i know how to fix it. You don’t own a car, so you don’t know how to fix one”. That’s all grand, except if you’re a really bad driver and the cost of fixing the car is so expensive that maybe it makes more sense to get the bus or a taxi instead.

You seem to have taken me up wrong John. Im not against NAMA, and im not against bailouts. You get the banking system you ask and vote for, but you’re responsible for it when it all goes t1ts up as well. What i am against is repeating our mistakes and not trying to create long term fixes for the most obvious ones. I believe that a small open economy like Ireland would be better served by not being ‘responsible’ for 70% or so of our banking system, a fairly innefficient and uncompetitive one at that.

I’d hardly call a fall in GDP of 9.4% a run-of-the-mill recession.

At least, it wouldn’t be run-of-the-mill in Ireland.

Maybe, its becoming run-of-the-mill in Finland, as its their second recession of this magnitude in little more than a decade.

At any rate, it means that all of this talk about Ireland having the biggest recession of any developed country since the Great Depression is a lot of hooey. We aren’t even having the biggest one this time round.

Re Finland’s banks, I know nothing about them, other than what you wrote above - namely that, having gone bust in their last mega-recession, they don’t own much by way of banks any more. And the way they’re going, they won’t own much by way of manufacturing soon (25% of it gone in a year). But, of countries that still own banks, I think you’ll find that most of them are organising bail-outs.

Good idea.

I think at the moment it is only the judgement that is made available.

I think that it is a pity that the public cannot access transcripts of these important cases. In fairness to Mr. Shipsey SC and his emerald green jersey/wig, we are only hearing his words second hand. If we really want justice to be done in public then let the public see, hear and read what is going on.

Transcription is expensive but the Courts microphone system has been hugely improved. Surely they could pick a case each week that is of particular public interest and email the sound file to the stenographers?

Even better, if the protagonists engage a stenographer then it should be a condition that a copy goes to the Judge with permission to publish. As things stand, both sides usually split the cost in big cases and the Judge gets a copy of the transcripts too.

sorry John, do you have any information about a mammoth Finnish banking bail-out in the works to the tune of 60bn or so? And if you’re a follower of the CDS and sovereign debt markets, well i’m sure you know that Finland is currently borrowing cash at around the same rate as the Germans, so it seems everyone else reckons they’re doing ok. But hey, if the long-legged-blondes storyline fits better with you then thats great…

Sorry to be flippant, but i’d take a run-of-the-mill recession in Finland over our banking crisis any day of the week.

Sorry about that. It just seems now that it is impossible to seperate the Nama debate from politics.

Rubicon ; problem is that nobody now knows the course of same river.

“@Gregg
Anglo should be wound down and the good assets if there are any sold off. Can’t see any reason why keeping it going is in the Public Interest.”

I agree. I think the Public Interest would have been best served by letting Anglo Irish go bankrupt (along with Irish Nationwide), and the wagons should have been circled around the rest.

I don’t think it is in the Public Interest to preserve Anglo Irish as a going concern.

Fianna Fail, The Green Party and Alan Dukes think it is in the Public Interest. Nay, they know it is in the Public Interest.

They collectively intend giving this sick pig the kiss of life. I hope for Dukes’s sake that pig is wearing strawberry lipstick. Still, with all the money he’s getting paid he’ll be able to buy a gold plated bath having squandered (what?) €10Bn of our money.

I just got this in an email from a disenchanted FF supporter. I had not been aware of it till now. My FF friend thinks it is time the party got back to basics….God help us all

De Valera
St Patricks Day 1943

“… The Ireland that we dreamed of would be the home of a people who valued material wealth only as a basis for right living, of a people who, satisfied with frugal comfort, devoted their leisure to the things of the spirit – a land whose countryside would be bright with cosy homesteads, whose fields and villages would be joyous with the sounds of industry, with the romping of sturdy children, the contest of athletic youths and the laughter of happy maidens, whose firesides would be forums for the wisdom of serene old age. The home, in short, of a people living the life that God desires that men should live. . . .”