Sig. Ernesto
Vivace Impertinenza
Sta per calare la ghigliottina.
Ultima modifica:
Mps: "Converto a patto che..." (1 Viewer)
- Creatore Discussione Sig. Ernesto
- Data di Inizio
Sig. Ernesto
Vivace Impertinenza
ps: "nessun premio, nessun regalo".
Si salvano senior e correntisti. Non è una festa di compeanno. E un burden sharing, lacrime e sangue per il rendimento subordinato. E non date retta a principi del foro altrui..pregate e portate a casa quel che verra', rapidamente.
Saluti,
Si salvano senior e correntisti. Non è una festa di compeanno. E un burden sharing, lacrime e sangue per il rendimento subordinato. E non date retta a principi del foro altrui..pregate e portate a casa quel che verra', rapidamente.
Saluti,
acinorev
Forumer attivo
E l'art.19 lo revisioneranno ancora?
locco68
violaforever
acinorev
Forumer attivo
MPS – RIMPALLO TRA BRUSSELLES E FRANCOFORTE FRENA IL PIANO DI SALVATAGGIO
[Flash] Il piano presentato dallo stato italiano sulla ricapitalizzazione di Mps, che prevede l’intervento pubblico secondo le modalità previste dal decreto salva-banche, è nel limbo da due mesi per una situazione paradossale che si è creata tra i due organi di controllo europei, che dovrebbero dare il via libera all’operazione. Da una parte la Commissione Europea deve esaminare l’operazione sotto il profilo degli aiuti di stato, dall’altra l’organo di vigilanza della Banca Centrale europea deve riconoscere il rispetto delle norme sulla ricapitalizzazione preventiva e la ripartizione delle perdite. Tra le due istituzioni, secondo quanto riportato dal Financial Times, si è creata una situazione di stallo che frena l’approvazione dell’operazione.
[Flash] Il piano presentato dallo stato italiano sulla ricapitalizzazione di Mps, che prevede l’intervento pubblico secondo le modalità previste dal decreto salva-banche, è nel limbo da due mesi per una situazione paradossale che si è creata tra i due organi di controllo europei, che dovrebbero dare il via libera all’operazione. Da una parte la Commissione Europea deve esaminare l’operazione sotto il profilo degli aiuti di stato, dall’altra l’organo di vigilanza della Banca Centrale europea deve riconoscere il rispetto delle norme sulla ricapitalizzazione preventiva e la ripartizione delle perdite. Tra le due istituzioni, secondo quanto riportato dal Financial Times, si è creata una situazione di stallo che frena l’approvazione dell’operazione.
Owblisky
Compravendite mobiliari
Ho paura che a tentare di realizzare rapidamente saranno in molti. Pochi i fortunati che ci riusciranno.
Se il crollo porterà i prezzi sotto il prezzo a cui entra lo stato, sto meditando se sia il caso di comprare azioni post adc.
acinorev
Forumer attivo
financial times prima pagina :
3 HOURS AGO by: Alex Barker in Brussels, Claire Jones in Frankfurt and Rachel Sanderson in Milan
Brussels and the European Central Bank are at odds over the capital plans of Monte dei Paschi di Siena,*throwing doubt on details of the state rescue of Italy’s oldest and most troubled bank.
Rome’s*proposal to recapitalise MPS has been in*limbo since December because the ECB, the bank’s supervisor, and the European Commission, which polices state aid, have different views on their responsibilities and the merits of taxpayer bailouts.*
The two-month stand-off leaves fundamental questions over the rescue proposals, including the level of state support allowed, the amount of losses that creditors will suffer and the depth of restructuring needed to make the bank viable.
Senior eurozone officials and bankers warn it could take several months to resolve a*protracted bank saga that has*damaged confidence in Italy’s financial sector and tested rules implemented by the EU after the financial crisis.
The Single Supervisory Mechanism, the ECB’s supervisory wing, believes it is waiting for Brussels to agree a plan to restructure MPS and approve state aid. Yet Brussels, in turn, thinks it is waiting for the supervisors to agree a capital plan with MPS before it can finalise restructuring terms.
One person involved in the process called the situation “surreal”.
So-called “precautionary recapitalisation” of solvent banks is allowed under EU rules but can cover only the capital gap identified in the*most stringent scenario of a stress test, which regulators carry out periodically to assess the health of banks in the bloc.
This approach avoids*tougher EU requirements for 8 per cent of a struggling bank’s liabilities — including senior creditors — to be wiped out before taxpayer funds can be used.
The Big Read
Is Italy’s financial future resting on UniCredit?
A €13bn share sale could restore confidence in both the bank and the country
The ECB and the commission differences relate to the Frankfurt supervisors’ view that MPS needs about €8.8bn in capital.*The EU side sees it as essential to have a more detailed plan from the Single Supervisory Mechanism, which would*set out levels of expected losses and explain how capital needs were calculated, in order to*approve legal use of state support.
That is because EU state aid rules require incurred or expected losses to be covered by money bailed-in from creditors or private funds, not by a taxpayer intervention.
Germany is particularly concerned that soft treatment of MPS would set a legal precedent that undermines post-crisis EU rules designed to end taxpayer bailouts.*
In December the SSM controversially rejected MPS’s plea for more time to deliver on a €5bn plan to raise fresh capital and*increased the amount of capital the lender needed to raise to €8.8bn.
While supervisors’ December threat to MPS won*it credibility, critics say its subsequent lack of action on the lender*has raised fresh doubts over its reputation.
“The biggest test [facing the SSM] is clearly Italy,” said Nicolas Véron, a senior fellow at Bruegel, a think-tank in Brussels. “A corner was turned with the refusal to extend the MPS plan, but things have been very slow since then . . . If we don’t see something soon, there will be a big question mark.”
FT View
A bailout of Monte dei Paschi is not enough
So long as structural problems fester, more rescues will be needed
A document on the Bank of Italy’s website sets out the reasoning behind the new €8.8bn figure — including detailed information on how much the Italian state could contribute to the capital raising and how much must come from retail depositors under the terms of the EU’s bail-in rules.
Underlying the differences between Frankfurt and Brussels are divergent philosophies on state aid.*The ECB,*with the job of maintaining financial stability,*wants to secure the health of the lender regardless of cost to the taxpayer. For Brussels, the size of taxpayer support matters and any perception of special treatment for MPS will lead to protests from lenders elsewhere in the bloc.
“Often there is a little bit of a dispute between the commission and the ECB about what measures the ECB can take,” said Andreas von Bonin, a partner at the Brussels office of law firm Freshfields. “There is also a philosophical issue, because the ECB is less averse to state aid than [the commission’s competition arm]. One example was what we had with the Greek restructuring . . . the ECB was a lot more critical of measures the Greek banks wanted to take on their own.”
Italy has yet to submit a restructuring plan for MPS to the commission or a formal application for the use of state aid.
An Italian official said talks were on track. Italy had a productive meeting with Brussels to start settling details of the precautionary recap 10 days ago, this person said. Officials and bankers expect the state deal to be finalised by May.
3 HOURS AGO by: Alex Barker in Brussels, Claire Jones in Frankfurt and Rachel Sanderson in Milan
Brussels and the European Central Bank are at odds over the capital plans of Monte dei Paschi di Siena,*throwing doubt on details of the state rescue of Italy’s oldest and most troubled bank.
Rome’s*proposal to recapitalise MPS has been in*limbo since December because the ECB, the bank’s supervisor, and the European Commission, which polices state aid, have different views on their responsibilities and the merits of taxpayer bailouts.*
The two-month stand-off leaves fundamental questions over the rescue proposals, including the level of state support allowed, the amount of losses that creditors will suffer and the depth of restructuring needed to make the bank viable.
Senior eurozone officials and bankers warn it could take several months to resolve a*protracted bank saga that has*damaged confidence in Italy’s financial sector and tested rules implemented by the EU after the financial crisis.
The Single Supervisory Mechanism, the ECB’s supervisory wing, believes it is waiting for Brussels to agree a plan to restructure MPS and approve state aid. Yet Brussels, in turn, thinks it is waiting for the supervisors to agree a capital plan with MPS before it can finalise restructuring terms.
One person involved in the process called the situation “surreal”.
So-called “precautionary recapitalisation” of solvent banks is allowed under EU rules but can cover only the capital gap identified in the*most stringent scenario of a stress test, which regulators carry out periodically to assess the health of banks in the bloc.
This approach avoids*tougher EU requirements for 8 per cent of a struggling bank’s liabilities — including senior creditors — to be wiped out before taxpayer funds can be used.
The Big Read
Is Italy’s financial future resting on UniCredit?
A €13bn share sale could restore confidence in both the bank and the country
The ECB and the commission differences relate to the Frankfurt supervisors’ view that MPS needs about €8.8bn in capital.*The EU side sees it as essential to have a more detailed plan from the Single Supervisory Mechanism, which would*set out levels of expected losses and explain how capital needs were calculated, in order to*approve legal use of state support.
That is because EU state aid rules require incurred or expected losses to be covered by money bailed-in from creditors or private funds, not by a taxpayer intervention.
Germany is particularly concerned that soft treatment of MPS would set a legal precedent that undermines post-crisis EU rules designed to end taxpayer bailouts.*
In December the SSM controversially rejected MPS’s plea for more time to deliver on a €5bn plan to raise fresh capital and*increased the amount of capital the lender needed to raise to €8.8bn.
While supervisors’ December threat to MPS won*it credibility, critics say its subsequent lack of action on the lender*has raised fresh doubts over its reputation.
“The biggest test [facing the SSM] is clearly Italy,” said Nicolas Véron, a senior fellow at Bruegel, a think-tank in Brussels. “A corner was turned with the refusal to extend the MPS plan, but things have been very slow since then . . . If we don’t see something soon, there will be a big question mark.”
FT View
A bailout of Monte dei Paschi is not enough
So long as structural problems fester, more rescues will be needed
A document on the Bank of Italy’s website sets out the reasoning behind the new €8.8bn figure — including detailed information on how much the Italian state could contribute to the capital raising and how much must come from retail depositors under the terms of the EU’s bail-in rules.
Underlying the differences between Frankfurt and Brussels are divergent philosophies on state aid.*The ECB,*with the job of maintaining financial stability,*wants to secure the health of the lender regardless of cost to the taxpayer. For Brussels, the size of taxpayer support matters and any perception of special treatment for MPS will lead to protests from lenders elsewhere in the bloc.
“Often there is a little bit of a dispute between the commission and the ECB about what measures the ECB can take,” said Andreas von Bonin, a partner at the Brussels office of law firm Freshfields. “There is also a philosophical issue, because the ECB is less averse to state aid than [the commission’s competition arm]. One example was what we had with the Greek restructuring . . . the ECB was a lot more critical of measures the Greek banks wanted to take on their own.”
Italy has yet to submit a restructuring plan for MPS to the commission or a formal application for the use of state aid.
An Italian official said talks were on track. Italy had a productive meeting with Brussels to start settling details of the precautionary recap 10 days ago, this person said. Officials and bankers expect the state deal to be finalised by May.
condor74
Forumer attivo
Brussels and ECB split on Monte dei Paschi’s capital proposals
Differing views on merits of taxpayer bailouts cast doubt on rescue of troubled bank
High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our T&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail.
Subscribe to read
Brussels and the European Central Bank are at odds over the capital plans of Monte dei Paschi di Siena, throwing doubt on details of the state rescue of Italy’s oldest and most troubled bank.
Rome’s proposal to recapitalise MPS has been in limbo since December because the ECB, the bank’s supervisor, and the European Commission, which polices state aid, have different views on their responsibilities and the merits of taxpayer bailouts. The two-month stand-off leaves fundamental questions over the rescue proposals, including the level of state support allowed, the amount of losses that creditors will suffer and the depth of restructuring needed to make the bank viable. Senior eurozone officials and bankers warn it could take several months to resolve a protracted bank saga that has damaged confidence in Italy’s financial sector and tested rules implemented by the EU after the financial crisis. The Single Supervisory Mechanism, the ECB’s supervisory wing, believes it is waiting for Brussels to agree a plan to restructure MPS and approve state aid. Yet Brussels, in turn, thinks it is waiting for the supervisors to agree a capital plan with MPS before it can finalise restructuring terms. One person involved in the process called the situation “surreal”. So-called “precautionary recapitalisation” of solvent banks is allowed under EU rules but can cover only the capital gap identified in the most stringent scenario of a stress test, which regulators carry out periodically to assess the health of banks in the bloc. This approach avoids tougher EU requirements for 8 per cent of a struggling bank’s liabilities — including senior creditors — to be wiped out before taxpayer funds can be used.
The ECB and the commission differences relate to the Frankfurt supervisors’ view that MPS needs about €8.8bn in capital. The EU side sees it as essential to have a more detailed plan from the Single Supervisory Mechanism, which would set out levels of expected losses and explain how capital needs were calculated, in order to approve legal use of state support. That is because EU state aid rules require incurred or expected losses to be covered by money bailed-in from creditors or private funds, not by a taxpayer intervention. Germany is particularly concerned that soft treatment of MPS would set a legal precedent that undermines post-crisis EU rules designed to end taxpayer bailouts. In December the SSM controversially rejected MPS’s plea for more time to deliver on a €5bn plan to raise fresh capital and increased the amount of capital the lender needed to raise to €8.8bn. While supervisors’ December threat to MPS won it credibility, critics say its subsequent lack of action on the lender has raised fresh doubts over its reputation. “The biggest test [facing the SSM] is clearly Italy,” said Nicolas Véron, a senior fellow at Bruegel, a think-tank in Brussels. “A corner was turned with the refusal to extend the MPS plan, but things have been very slow since then . . . If we don’t see something soon, there will be a big question mark.”
A document on the Bank of Italy’s website sets out the reasoning behind the new €8.8bn figure — including detailed information on how much the Italian state could contribute to the capital raising and how much must come from retail depositors under the terms of the EU’s bail-in rules. Underlying the differences between Frankfurt and Brussels are divergent philosophies on state aid. The ECB, with the job of maintaining financial stability, wants to secure the health of the lender regardless of cost to the taxpayer. For Brussels, the size of taxpayer support matters and any perception of special treatment for MPS will lead to protests from lenders elsewhere in the bloc. “Often there is a little bit of a dispute between the commission and the ECB about what measures the ECB can take,” said Andreas von Bonin, a partner at the Brussels office of law firm Freshfields. “There is also a philosophical issue, because the ECB is less averse to state aid than [the commission’s competition arm]. One example was what we had with the Greek restructuring . . . the ECB was a lot more critical of measures the Greek banks wanted to take on their own.” Italy has yet to submit a restructuring plan for MPS to the commission or a formal application for the use of state aid. An Italian official said talks were on track. Italy had a productive meeting with Brussels to start settling details of the precautionary recap 10 days ago, this person said. Officials and bankers expect the state deal to be finalised by May.
Differing views on merits of taxpayer bailouts cast doubt on rescue of troubled bank
High quality global journalism requires investment. Please share this article with others using the link below, do not cut & paste the article. See our T&Cs and Copyright Policy for more detail.
Subscribe to read
Brussels and the European Central Bank are at odds over the capital plans of Monte dei Paschi di Siena, throwing doubt on details of the state rescue of Italy’s oldest and most troubled bank.
Rome’s proposal to recapitalise MPS has been in limbo since December because the ECB, the bank’s supervisor, and the European Commission, which polices state aid, have different views on their responsibilities and the merits of taxpayer bailouts. The two-month stand-off leaves fundamental questions over the rescue proposals, including the level of state support allowed, the amount of losses that creditors will suffer and the depth of restructuring needed to make the bank viable. Senior eurozone officials and bankers warn it could take several months to resolve a protracted bank saga that has damaged confidence in Italy’s financial sector and tested rules implemented by the EU after the financial crisis. The Single Supervisory Mechanism, the ECB’s supervisory wing, believes it is waiting for Brussels to agree a plan to restructure MPS and approve state aid. Yet Brussels, in turn, thinks it is waiting for the supervisors to agree a capital plan with MPS before it can finalise restructuring terms. One person involved in the process called the situation “surreal”. So-called “precautionary recapitalisation” of solvent banks is allowed under EU rules but can cover only the capital gap identified in the most stringent scenario of a stress test, which regulators carry out periodically to assess the health of banks in the bloc. This approach avoids tougher EU requirements for 8 per cent of a struggling bank’s liabilities — including senior creditors — to be wiped out before taxpayer funds can be used.
The ECB and the commission differences relate to the Frankfurt supervisors’ view that MPS needs about €8.8bn in capital. The EU side sees it as essential to have a more detailed plan from the Single Supervisory Mechanism, which would set out levels of expected losses and explain how capital needs were calculated, in order to approve legal use of state support. That is because EU state aid rules require incurred or expected losses to be covered by money bailed-in from creditors or private funds, not by a taxpayer intervention. Germany is particularly concerned that soft treatment of MPS would set a legal precedent that undermines post-crisis EU rules designed to end taxpayer bailouts. In December the SSM controversially rejected MPS’s plea for more time to deliver on a €5bn plan to raise fresh capital and increased the amount of capital the lender needed to raise to €8.8bn. While supervisors’ December threat to MPS won it credibility, critics say its subsequent lack of action on the lender has raised fresh doubts over its reputation. “The biggest test [facing the SSM] is clearly Italy,” said Nicolas Véron, a senior fellow at Bruegel, a think-tank in Brussels. “A corner was turned with the refusal to extend the MPS plan, but things have been very slow since then . . . If we don’t see something soon, there will be a big question mark.”
A document on the Bank of Italy’s website sets out the reasoning behind the new €8.8bn figure — including detailed information on how much the Italian state could contribute to the capital raising and how much must come from retail depositors under the terms of the EU’s bail-in rules. Underlying the differences between Frankfurt and Brussels are divergent philosophies on state aid. The ECB, with the job of maintaining financial stability, wants to secure the health of the lender regardless of cost to the taxpayer. For Brussels, the size of taxpayer support matters and any perception of special treatment for MPS will lead to protests from lenders elsewhere in the bloc. “Often there is a little bit of a dispute between the commission and the ECB about what measures the ECB can take,” said Andreas von Bonin, a partner at the Brussels office of law firm Freshfields. “There is also a philosophical issue, because the ECB is less averse to state aid than [the commission’s competition arm]. One example was what we had with the Greek restructuring . . . the ECB was a lot more critical of measures the Greek banks wanted to take on their own.” Italy has yet to submit a restructuring plan for MPS to the commission or a formal application for the use of state aid. An Italian official said talks were on track. Italy had a productive meeting with Brussels to start settling details of the precautionary recap 10 days ago, this person said. Officials and bankers expect the state deal to be finalised by May.
Sig. Ernesto
Vivace Impertinenza
The European Commission is working with Italy and the European Central Bank on a rescue plan for Italy's troubled bank Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena (BMPS.MI), spokesmen said on Thursday.
The comments by spokesmen from both European institutions followed press reports of an impasse.
Monte dei Paschi asked for state support last year after failing to raise 5 billion euros (4 billion pounds) on the market to shore up its capital. But that has yet to be approved by the European Commission and the ECB.
Asked whether the Commission and the ECB were clashing over the plan, a spokesman for the Commission told a news conference: "We are working with the Italian authorities and the supervisory authorities to assess the compatibility of the plans by the Italian government with EU rules."
An ECB spokesman said Frankfurt was cooperating fully but finding an agreement was a task for the Commission and the Italian government.
"Agreement on the precautionary recapitalisation is solely the responsibility of the Italian authorities and the EU Commission," the spokesman said. "We are fully cooperating with the Commission to support their assessment."
The Commission is still waiting for the ECB to finalise its assessment of Monte Paschi's capital shortfalls before it can approve the bank's rescue plan.
(Reporting by Francesco Guarascio and Francesco Canepa; Editing by Philip Blenkinsop and Tom Heneghan)
The comments by spokesmen from both European institutions followed press reports of an impasse.
Monte dei Paschi asked for state support last year after failing to raise 5 billion euros (4 billion pounds) on the market to shore up its capital. But that has yet to be approved by the European Commission and the ECB.
Asked whether the Commission and the ECB were clashing over the plan, a spokesman for the Commission told a news conference: "We are working with the Italian authorities and the supervisory authorities to assess the compatibility of the plans by the Italian government with EU rules."
An ECB spokesman said Frankfurt was cooperating fully but finding an agreement was a task for the Commission and the Italian government.
"Agreement on the precautionary recapitalisation is solely the responsibility of the Italian authorities and the EU Commission," the spokesman said. "We are fully cooperating with the Commission to support their assessment."
The Commission is still waiting for the ECB to finalise its assessment of Monte Paschi's capital shortfalls before it can approve the bank's rescue plan.
(Reporting by Francesco Guarascio and Francesco Canepa; Editing by Philip Blenkinsop and Tom Heneghan)
Ventodivino
מגן ולא יראה
Ernesto a 26 ce lo compriamo un T1 MPS ?
O un T2 veneto a 28 ?
(io ho peccato con entrambi)
Peccherei anche con Carige, ma prezzo ancora altino.
Un professional (seppur dilettante) -matematico come lei non può essere anelastico alla variazione del prezzo (si ricorda cosa diceva, concordavo e concordo, relativamente ai prezzi delle BDM ?) : esiste sempre un prezzo per cui valga la pena entrare.
Scomessa era quella, scommesse sono queste .
Cordialità.
O un T2 veneto a 28 ?
(io ho peccato con entrambi)
Peccherei anche con Carige, ma prezzo ancora altino.
Un professional (seppur dilettante) -matematico come lei non può essere anelastico alla variazione del prezzo (si ricorda cosa diceva, concordavo e concordo, relativamente ai prezzi delle BDM ?) : esiste sempre un prezzo per cui valga la pena entrare.
Scomessa era quella, scommesse sono queste .
Cordialità.
Ultima modifica: