Not sure if this thread will catch on, because no-one here seems to have much to say about individual british banks, but thought i would add this header to see if we could discuss dividend yields, exposure to sup-prime, good ones, bad ones, take-over targets, when the crisis will end? do you think they have learnt their lesson? I, for one, as a property developer have seen first hand how much stricter they have become with lending habits, struggling to get decent rates for re-mortgaging, basically they appear scared to lend to anyone.

Could make a few quid in the next few days with the UK banks I feel the USA $700 billion loan will be approved with a few amendments in the next few days poss Monday.

HSBC has taken the axe to its workforce, sacking 1,100 investment banking staff including 500 in Britain.

Britain's biggest bank said the cuts were necessary because of the difficult market conditions and the poor economic outlook for 2009.

The bank had attempted to make the cull without any public statement, but word quickly got out as hundreds of employees in the bank's Canary Wharf headquarters in London's Docklands were told the grim news.

The sacked staff are thought to include high-paid investment bankers as well as more junior back-office and administrative staff in London. Europe and the US took the rest of the cuts.

The cull is in the global banking and markets division, which serves large global companies and investment clients. There is no effect on its high street operations.

Britain's financial services industry is dramatically rethinking its employment needs in the face of the financial crisis. Bradford & Bingley axed 370 jobs yesterday and tens of thousands more will go as a result of the takeover of HBOS by Lloyds TSB. Thousands of Lehman Brothers staff in the UK are still not sure about their future, although the takeover of some of its operations by Nomura is expected to save some jobs.

"It's regrettable and difficult for our people, but an exercise to reduce headcount [in the global banking and markets division] by 4 per cent is not a big story," an HSBC spokesman said, confirming the job losses and explaining the decision not to go public at first.

Redundancy terms vary, but length of service is a major determinant of compensation packages.

HSBC was one of the first banks to be clobbered by the subprime mortgage crisis in the United States and has booked writedowns or losses of $18.7 billion since the start of 2007.

A deal designed to rescue the banking system and save the world economy from catastrophe - but costing each American taxpayer $5,300 - dissolved into chaos last night after Republicans refused to endorse a $700 billion dollar package.

Talks are due to reopen later today after political high drama in Washington when talks broke into a verbal brawl in the Cabinet Room of the White House amid urgent warnings from the president and pleas from Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson, who reportedly knelt before the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and appealed for her support.

I didnt know you were Catholic, Ms Pelosi said, a wry reference to Mr Paulsons kneeling, The New York Times reported. She went on: Its not me blowing this up, its the Republicans.

She was referring to the surprise announcement from the House Republican leader, John A. Boehner of Ohio, who told those gathered at the White House that his caucus could not support the plan. He pressed an alternative that involved a smaller role for the Government.

Some senior Democratic figures suspect opposition is being choreographed so that John McCain could be seen to deliver an eleventh-hour solution today. Others suggest that with fewer than a hundred House Republicans prepared to vote for the measure, Democrats may be left carrying the can for a deeply unpopular and high-risk deal.

Stock markets had breathed a sigh of relief when Congressional leaders heralded what would be the biggest bailout in history before a weekend deadline set by President Bush.

But within hours a series of senior Republicans had lined up to insist there was no agreement while a White House meeting between Barack Obama and Mr McCain, as well as key figures from Congress, broke up with all sides accepting more work was needed.

Both presidential candidates sat at opposite ends of a long conference table, with Mr Bush and Congressional leaders in between. Mr Obama was more vocal in his questioning of Mr Paulson that Mr McCain, who said little, according to US media reports.

Before the meeting broke up, Mr Bush issued a warning about the dire consequences if the Bill did not pass. "If money isn't loosened up, this sucker could go down," the President said, according to one report.

Richard Shelby, the senior Republican on the Senate Banking Committee, was first to emerge from the White House summit to announce "the agreement is obviously no agreement".

So which sector will be the first to fly out of the traps...? what will next year bring? im thinking the economy obviously is going to worsen, but i reckon we are due a good bounce... Are the banks looking good for a revival now?

I doubt it.

They have been under heavy pressure recently Ted whilst oils and miners have rallied considerably from lows, I hope so. Perhaps one factor that has been present with the shorting ban is that traders have been unwilling to close shorts as they know they cannot re-open them. This is particularly significant to those hedging their existing positions or operating a pairs trade e.g. Long HSBC/ short RBS.I certainly prefer to trade stocks long/ short for if the market tumbles and for example my lloyds long from 129 has been a bit sick and shorts with Wos/BHP have gone up instead of mirroring Lloyds.Bolton is bullish Banks in the New Year though he has been since last Summer!

I gather Barclay's are washing their hands of Swarfega this weekend, must have got their fingers dirty!

My understanding is that a SM recovery needs to be led by the sector that caused it's collapse ie banks. Until they start to recover, expect the SM to remain in the doldrums.

Funny i've just had to amend the header and remove B&B, AL. and now HBOS...
that was half of the charts...!

Fingers crossed you won't have to remove any more!

Interesting watching the session with MPs committee this afternoon. Impressed with Daniels and Hester, so maybe the taxpayer has grounds for some cautious optimism, although still do not understand why Lloyds took on HBOS.

As a LTSB shareholder who does? Maybe he will become Lord Daniels in due course, although he may be an american?

Was an investor in both HBOS and Lloyds at the end, so quite happy to see the 2 merged. In fact most money was routed the HBOS way as the pricing was so distorted

However what a stich up for the pure ex lloyds holders - transparently obvious as evidenced on virtually every share BB at the time

Now I understand how we got into this mess......................

Linda is the proprietor of a bar in Cork . In order to increase sales, she decides to allow her loyal customers - most of whom are unemployed alcoholics - to drink now but pay later. She keeps track of the drinks consumed on a ledger (thereby granting the customers loans). Word gets around and as a result increasing numbers of customers flood into Linda's bar. Taking advantage of her customers' freedom from immediate payment constraints, Linda increases her prices for wine and beer, the most-consumed beverages. Her sales volume increases massively. A young and dynamic customer service consultant at the local bank recognizes these customer debts as valuable future assets and increases Linda's borrowing limit. He sees no reason for undue concern since he has the debts of the alcoholics as collateral.

At the bank's corporate headquarters, expert bankers transform these customer assets into DRINKBONDS, ALKBONDS and PUKEBONDS. These securities are then traded on markets worldwide. No one really understands what these abbreviations mean and how the securities are guaranteed. Nevertheless, as their prices continuously climb, the securities become top-selling items. One day, although the prices are still climbing, a risk manager (subsequently of course fired due to his negativity) of the bank decides that slowly the time has come to demand payment of the debts incurred by the drinkers at Linda's bar. However they cannot pay back the debts. Linda cannot fulfil her loan obligations and claims bankruptcy. DRINKBOND and ALKBOND drop in price by 95 %. PUKEBOND performs better, stabilizing in price after dropping by 80 %. The suppliers of Linda's bar, having granted her generous payment due dates and having invested in the securities are faced with a new situation. Her wine supplier claims bankruptcy, her beer supplier is taken over by a competitor.

The bank is saved by the Government following dramatic round-the-clock consultations by leaders from the governing political parties (and vested interests). The funds required for this purpose are obtained by a tax levied on the non-drinkers

Now I understand Thanks Spitfire

Beautifully put!, why couldn't the 'experts' have seen what was happening?; perhaps they should have used your methodology Spitfire!

Spitfire for Chancellor of the Exchequer I say. Or PM. Or both. Drink anyone? :o)