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.

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)