Rather than simply dismissing those who are directly experienced in this field you may consider learning from their greater level of understanding. Its a bit like your dodgy pension, and almost as important.

You can almost touch the arrogance and condescension. 😆
What blinkers for EU mass debating?

Reading the last few pages of this thread it’s obvious why the banking industry stumbles from crisis to crash. Three of the people above are responsible for managing lots of money some of which could be mine.

In view of the head-in-the-sand optimism displayed bu Mefty, THM and Jamba and their collective rubbishing of any news that might inconvenience them or even screw their industry I’m beginning to think I’d be better off investing in an empty field and doing nothing with it.

The last few weeks of this thread can be summed up as “three Brexit bankers in denial versus those working in the real world producing goods and services rather than just taking a cut”.

Snow beckons.

THM, calling TJ names makes you look… well, like what you are. You’ve been doing it for as long as I can remember. Playing the man not the ball makes you look… well, like what you are.

jambalaya – Member
Interesting piece on how and why Vote Leave spent a whopping £3m plus with a small Canadian digital marketing company

I think the use of Cambridge Analytica’s ‘people search engine’ by Leave.EU (and Trump) is more interesting.

To him, the internet had always seemed like a gift from heaven. What he really wanted was to give something back, to share. Data can be copied, so why shouldn’t everyone benefit from it? It was the spirit of a whole generation, the beginning of a new era that transcended the limitations of the physical world. But what would happen, wondered Kosinski, if someone abused his people search engine to manipulate people? He began to add warnings to most of his scientific work. His approach, he warned, “could pose a threat to an individual’s well-being, freedom, or even life.”[/b] But no one seemed to grasp what he meant.

Leave.EU and Trump use of ‘people search engine’

The weaponised AI propaganda machine

Facts don’t work – targeting low information voters

Edukator – nothing to do with optimism it’s simply about realism and understanding

More exaggeration again! So understanding is what leads to financial crises and crashes! Brilliant. Enjoy your empty field and it’s barren harvest.

While you are there you might want to start by taking one EU related activity – let’s say EU equity sales and trading – and consider how regulations affect it now and in the future

Once you have done that you will understand why the exaggerated claims made above simply make the posters look silly. At least TJ has watered down his original claims but is still over- egging the case. That’s the stuff that leads to crises not reasoned analysis

A grain of truth can be turned into a loaf of hyperbole as we can see.

P.S. don’t forget I voted to remain. One reason was to avoid the harm that this WILL cause the FS industry. But that doesn’t prevent me from understanding the nature and limits of that harm.

Enjoy your empty field and it’s barren harvest.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-3152049/Cost-English-farmland-trebles-10-years-outperforming-FTSE-100-index-central-London-property-market.html

THM, care to deal with your claim that DD is going soft on FoM?

A more important issue is that for every £100k job moved you’ve lost the tax to support probably a dozen folk (in normal jobs).

Or a £1m job loses the monies to keep an MP in comfort

So the Dutch Government has commissioned a study as to whether its possible to leave the euro. Will be interesting, personally I am expecting a Cameron/Osborne level of scaremingering but Wilders lead in the polls has made this happen.

b r yes I absolutely get that and have made that point repeatedly. The numbers get even starker as you go up to (say) £200k, £300k etc (above £150k tye tax take is 45+2+12.8 NI = 60%) It’s just that the past 5 years have been on here no one has given much of a toss about bankers before. We’ve lost 10,000’s of £100k plus jobs. Lloyds/HBOS merger/takeover/rescue saw 40,000 jobs go.

We’ll have all the immigrants we need post Brexit. They wil be granted visas after having made an application supported by their employers, farmers and the NHS included

More likely to be 6 month work visa with very little involved, like I had to go to Australia 20 years back. Didn’t even need a job or reference. Just get on a plane, find work if I could, come home when money runs out if not.

We’ll have all the immigrants we need post Brexit. They wil be granted visas after having made an application supported by their employers, farmers and the NHS included

I doubt that. The current process for people coming from outside the EU is a lot more onerous. And it’s hard to see the government making it easier.

You have to find an employer who will sponsor you (which itself requires jumping through hoops for the employer that only larger companies can afford).

You and your employer have to pay the government some money (not sure how much but it’s enough to put people off on low salaries).

And worst of all, if your employer decides to let you go, you have a couple of weeks in which to find a new employer or you have to leave the country. Which is a pretty strong deterrent to putting down any kind of roots.

I think we will struggle to fill places.

https://www.gov.uk/tier-2-general

DD pre-Brexshit referendum

We face a “disastrous migration crisis

DD post-Brexshit referendum, pre-A50 trigeer

UK workers will not/can not fill jobs currently taken by EU immigrants (at least not for some time)
Any immigration controls will have to be PHASED IN over time
This will take “MANY YEARS”

If that is DD with a hard on, he is going to need quite a few little blue tablets when the proper negotiations start. More likely he will continue his semi-flaccid stance. Why do you reckon that I “woody” DS was so quick to refute this conciliatory tone?

Bring on the negotiations and lets see….

TJ – I linked a 72 page report which discusses in some depth, which business don’t need either passporting or equivalence (Retail Asset Management and Direct Insurance for example), which need equivalence (Sales and Trading for example) and which need passporting or an alternative solution (wholesale banking). The report also links to quite a lot of other material to back up its points. If newspaper stories are your limit, there is this story. However that Economist story is consistent with much of what I have said as well.

Second lets be realistic about how banking works, it is managed trans-nationally so when I got my approval for a transaction I could book it in which ever entity within our European management group I needed to. Local approval was merely a rubber stamp. I didn’t need to move from London to close a deal in a number of jurisdictions – I haven’t even been to some of the countries I’ve booked deals in.

Edukator, THM voted remain as he noted earlier, it surprises me that you haven’t noticed this – perhaps you have tunnel vision – as I can think of few posters who were more vociferous in their support before the vote. I also voted remain, although I was never particularly concerned about the effect on the City other issues worried me. Jamba obviously was Leave, however like many on here I think much of his personal manifesto is a bit mad. But don’t worry about me with your money, I have been semi-retired for 10 years and just do individual projects now.

Useful link Mefty, but, there could be very real political pressure for EU counties to reduce their reliance on a City that will no longer be in the EU. In fact, the more May seeks to cut us off from our European partners, the more incentive they have to reject measures proposed (by both UK and rEU companies and institutions) to keep arrangments as close to the current situation as possible.

I”d better preempt the “May is looking for the best possible access” comment, and clarify that May hasn’t said that she is seeking to cut us off at all… she is just boxing us into that corner with her FoM and court jurisdiction positions.

I hadn’t missed the tens of times THM has repeated he voted reamin, Mefty. I’ve also noted the many times he’s told us to respect the vote and make the most of it. He’s then gone on to deny that the vote is having any effect in areas where there’s a mass of declarations from companies and institutions to say they will be impacted and how they plan to react. In the last few pages it’s been banking and Tj has presented a series of links to demonstrate THM is in denial and that as with any change in the rules, banks will change their business models to suit – more rubber stamping and people holding those rubber stamps in Europe and less in the UK to borrow from your example.

Companies go where the pools of capital are deepest. Barnier is a smart cookie (thx for the link mefty, good article for a paper report) and knows this and the importance of not cutting off noses to spite faces.

Its in everyone’s interests – bar Paris and FFurt real estate brokers etc – to keep things as close to the status quo as possible.

Kelvin, those are the things the people voted for, she just has to stay smart and let rhetoric keep the loonies happy while negotiating quietly with the real power brokers – they did this with austerity, so they have form here.

Don’t forget that banks are also lobbying BOTH sides very hard on all these issues.

[mefty, my specific and as yet unanswered question reflects that 15 years of my life involved selling IB services directly to EU institutions – albeit a few years ago now – and that current clients still do this. So I am v much involved still]

Its in everyone’s interests – bar Paris and FFurt real estate brokers etc – to keep things as close to the status quo as possible.

You really think that no European politician has his/her eye on the 11.5% of tax revenue that financial services contribute to the UK economy. A part of that is domestic but even if you strip that out there’s a huge pot of money for Euro governments to share if they cut out the city.

Macron launched an appeal while in London to French expats working in the City to return to France. If he wins the election I fully expect him to use Brexit to make the City less attractive to both European banks and bankers.

Jamba, how come you keep saying “we”? You don’t even live in the UK, you stay in France with your French wife. Like every bigot with the ridiculous contradiction in their lives they ignore. Farage with the German wife. Trump with the wife who wouldn’t get int he country now. My yank ex-father in law who hated Messicans even though he was married to one?

Ridiculous

I hadn’t missed the tens of times THM has repeated he voted reamin, Mefty. I’ve also noted the many times he’s told us to respect the vote and make the most of it.

Two sentences that are true – remarkable. Keep it up…

He’s then gone on to deny that the vote is having any effect in areas where there’s a mass of declarations from companies and institutions to say they will be impacted and how they plan to react.

Knew it wouldn’t last. Total tosh.

Not only have I confirmed it, I have even quoted specific numbers that quantify the impact under different scenarios from people I have worked with in the past. Proper research not just journo stuff.

What I have rejected is the wild exaggerations of the truth that others have used ^. They are simply untrue.

In the last few pages it’s been banking and Tj has presented a series of links to demonstrate THM is in denial and that as with any change in the rules, banks will change their business models to suit – more rubber stamping and people holding those rubber stamps in Europe and less in the UK to borrow from your example.

Talking of which…

TJ has quoted many. many links and kindly repeated some of them for our benefit.

All falsify his conclusions (1) that all banks are planning to leave the City of London and later (2) that they are moving all their EU IB businesses. They are not. They are planning and almost certainly will move some specifics parts of their businesses – I gave you estimates of the size. The update I provided from this week’s update from M Stan also showed how those plans have been scaled back considerably from previous guestimates. Remember?

The idea TJ put forward that EU IB activities were very profitable was, we can safely assume, for amusement purposes only.

Of course, they want the tax revenue and Macron has been very vocal too. Why wouldn’t he? He’s a politician with a country that has a fiscal hole.

But carry on making things up about about the topic, my views and whatever else takes your fancy. Its fun to read.

Of course, they want the tax revenue and Macron has been very vocal too. Why wouldn’t he? He’s a politician with a country that has a fiscal hole.[/I]

Are you want the UK to hurry up and give it away?

No I want her to accelerate the negotiations in order to remove the far more damaging levels of uncertainty. If she is smart the losses could be in the 1-5% region. If we dilly-dally and end up with WTO they could be significantly more (20-30%). Its obvious which is preferable.

Plus I have to make my own professional plans which are also affected by the outcome. The last 12 months have delayed them significantly. Enough….time to get back to work properly.

Fintech companies look to cut and run

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/25/brexit-fintech-exodus-begins-london-eu-luxembourg

He said: “Most of that money would have gone into the UK. We have 20 people in London, and that has grown rapidly. Without Brexit I would have been very confident that within five years it would be 200 people in London. Now it would be more like 40 to 50, and most of the difference will go into Luxembourg.“

Delaying the start of negotiations was a wise move by May. Time to prepare (and recruit) was needed.
The timescale she choose was purely political, but realistically she couldn’t delay any longer than she has due to the timing of both UK and EU parliament elections.
Any cries of “get on with it” underestimate the task.
An earlier start would have resulted in less time to negotiate a deal, as we’d have wasted the first 6 months trying to get in a position to start. Less time to negotiate would have made WTO rates, or worse, more likely, as both exit and new trade agreements were less likely to be arrived at.

I think you will find it was only dear old Jezza and a few of the nutcases who wanted an earlier start

Sound like anyone we know:

One of the many depressing aspects of the referendum has been the way some of the more extreme Brexiters have been exulting in interpreting it as the first step on the road to the break-up of the European Union. What is it about these people? Don’t they realise that the postwar arrangement that evolved into the EU was set up principally so that we should not yet again see Europe tearing itself apart?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/feb/26/brexit-whitehall-farce-threatens-heart-europe

Yourguitarhero, I am UK resident. I have been here (in France) a lot the past 9 months for personal reasons. Out of my 32 year career I have been based in London for all but 5 years of it.

Jamba obviously was Leave, however like many on here I think much of his personal manifesto is a bit mad. But don’t worry about me with your money, I have been semi-retired for 10 years and just do individual projects now.

Ouch 😐 and nice 🙂 aiming for something very similar as a matter of interest (or not)

No I want her to accelerate the negotiations in order to remove the far more damaging levels of uncertainty. If she is smart the losses could be in the 1-5% region. If we dilly-dally and end up with WTO they could be significantly more (20-30%). Its obvious which is preferable.

While I don’t disagree with your analysis you’re doing no more than guessing the percentages – and once past a 5% hit to GDP, that we probably won’t ever recover is too much for the country to handle IMO.

While I don’t disagree with your analysis you’re doing no more than guessing the percentages – and once past a 5% hit to GDP, that we probably won’t ever recover is too much for the country to handle IMO.

I think I have to disagree, THM does know what he’s talking about and he does see his figures as being factual and true, everyone else is speculating though.

I presumed THM was talking about % of financial sector business moving out of the UK, not GDP lost.

What is it about these people? Don’t they realise that the postwar arrangement that evolved into the EU was set up principally so that we should not yet again see Europe tearing itself apart?

This is my very real concern, European history has always been a grouping forms then ends in bloodshed as it falls apart. Why should the break up of the EU be any different to every previous case? The EU is not perfect but do we really need to see another few million die to massage egos?

I presumed THM was talking about % of financial sector business moving out of the UK, not GDP lost. [/I]

Why would you assume FS?

Why would you assume FS?

Because that was the topic at the time.

THM does know what he’s talking about and he does see his figures as being factual and true, everyone else is speculating though.

Everyone is still speculating at this stage. Including, and especially, those still working in FS.

I was pretty clear in what I was talking about – with those numbers couldn’t possibly be GDP unkess you are our resident amateur on these issues who does like to make outlandish and totally inaccurate claims about the hit to GDP (with incorrect links)

Furthermore, all I was dong was quoting an Oliver Whymann analysis. Why? Because I have worked with them in the past and they take a sensible approach to guesstimating. Their analysis is also good because it lays out the range of outcomes and the reasons for them. In addition, they debunk the absurdly pessimistic precautions made over several pages of this thread. Not that this is/was hard.

Everyone is still speculating at this stage. Including, and especially, those still working in FS.

I can’t agree, THM’s level of speculation is far more right than anyone else’s level of speculation, he even has data to prove it and friends and everyfink.

In addition, they debunk the absurdly pessimistic precautions made over several pages of this thread.

There’s only one thing that will do that. Time. Bookmark the thread.

Some people get proved right, Dominique de Villepin for example.

I was pretty clear in what I was talking about – with those numbers couldn’t possibly be GDP unkess you are our resident amateur on these issues who does like to make outlandish and totally inaccurate claims about the hit to GDP (with incorrect links)

No, just using your figures and a little google seems to show it’s not implausible that we could have a huge hit to GDP, as per 2008/9

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp

Different thing b r, different thing.

it’s not implausible that we could have a huge hit to GDP, as per 2008/9

That’s what the Treasury and Osbourne said wouod definitely happen. Except it didn’t. That and the Treasury has acknowledged being so wrong has damaged their reputation