Comments on: Regulatory arbitrage of the day, Barclays edition http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: q http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-6924 Fri, 18 Sep 2009 03:42:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/#comment-6924 article in housingwire differs from what you say.

they say that the assets remain on barclays’ balance sheet for regulatory cap purposes and that this move serves to lower balance sheet volatility for investors, not for regulatory capital purposes.

i don’t know the truth, but this story differs from yours:
http://www.housingwire.com/2009/09/17/ba rclays-sells-123bn-of-assets-to-protium- finance/

]]>
By: q http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-6912 Thu, 17 Sep 2009 18:59:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/#comment-6912 did nobody have to kick in equity capital? does barclays own all the equity of protium?

if there is enough equity capital at protium, then, sure, this makes sense.

]]>
By: Brown Ram http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-6909 Thu, 17 Sep 2009 17:21:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/#comment-6909 You should google R3 capital and Lehman. Same trick, different company (or is it really a different company?).

]]>
By: Luis Enrique http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-6907 Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:31:15 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/#comment-6907 Can you expand a bit – how has the amount of capital at risk gone up? Is it just 12.6>12.3? or is there something else going on? Why has the transparency to shareholders gone sharply down? Can’t shareholders find out about what’s going on at Protium as often and easily as they can obtain information about the value of toxic assets marked to market if they were still held by Barclays?

]]>
By: Mike Young http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-6904 Thu, 17 Sep 2009 16:02:20 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/09/17/regulatory-arbitrage-of-the-day-barclays-edition/#comment-6904 If Barclays had been bailed out by tax-payers the move would be outrageous – but it wasn’t. So as long as the transactions are legal and shareholders are happy then it’s no big deal.

It’s capitalism. Greed, short-term profits, the pursuit of bonuses, cosy deals with pals. Nothing’s changed.

]]>