# Sir Fred now Fred.



## amiller (Jan 1, 2009)

http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/news/goodwin-knighthood-decision

Thoughts on this? :speechles

Sour grapes? Scape goat? Fly with the crows die with the crows?

My thoughts are that he got his knighthood rightly for his services to banking; because at the time he had done so much for RBS and the UK economy. Yes, in the years following he went too far (ABN acquisition), but that was after his honoured achievements. Or does the title confer a sense of ongoing responsibility?


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

He was, and always will be the scape goat for the masses to spit at... nothing more.

The face of the economic bust.... a media sound bite...

He done what was asked of him, by the shareholders.... and most of the UK was always a shareholder of RBS through one way or another... they tend to forget that... 

:thumb:


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

You only have to look at this RBS Chairman's bonus business to know how the media are stirring up the public.

£1M in SHARES. Which he pays 50% tax on, then windfall tax on any value that HE puts on them as Chairman. 

Shares in a 'failing' company remember. One that is failing at a slower rate than others but failing none the less.

So we reneged on his contract. I hope the guy resigns, and moves to Barclays and gets a £10M bonus like the current chairman of Barclays (did nobody mention that?). 

Goodwin the same. The man is a scapegoat of course he is. I hope he resigns too with two fingers up at the public and the govt. I hear Greece need some good financial people.


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

You have to ask a few questions, like these things are usually done in private, so why has the PM, who has nothing really to do with it, decided that the time was right to once again try and publically upset everyone...

Could it be to draw attention away from the current CEO's bonus pay!?!?

hmmm 

At the end of the day, Fred the Shred hasn't been convicted of any wrong doing, even the FSA report cleared him...

Funny though, when you see convicted fraudsters like Gerald Ronson on the honours list for a CBE....

So it's OK to have a convict being honoured, but not someone without any charges against them...

Actually, that is about right for the UK... :wall::wall::wall::wall:

:thumb:


----------



## Mr_Mephistophel (Feb 28, 2011)

Can the PM actually strip him off this?

I thought that a recipiant is recommended for an honor but only the confering body can rescind it>
And as for bringing the honor system into disrepute, what a load of ********.

History is full of knighted individuals who have committed much worse.

Was Jeffrey Archer stripped of his by the way?


----------



## Gruffs (Dec 10, 2007)

The Cueball said:


> You have to ask a few questions, like these things are usually done in private, so why has the PM, who has nothing really to do with it, decided that the time was right to once again try and publically upset everyone...
> 
> Could it be to draw attention away from the current CEO's bonus pay!?!?
> 
> ...


You really do have to question the public when they see the £1M headline and don't realise that it is in shares which are worthless unless he sells them (won't be allowed) or makes a gain on them (good for RBS, good for UK PLC).

I was going to mention Geoffrey Archer who is Lord Geoffrey Archer BTW.

Also, how many MPs that fell foul of the expenses system kept their honours and pensions?

This is headline rubbish.


----------



## toomanycitroens (Jan 14, 2011)

If it was me I would be gutted, he was made a knight of the Realm for God's sake.
I would like to think those are not issued willy nilly in the first place. He must have done something right previously.


----------



## Bero (Mar 9, 2008)

As a CEO you do what: -

A) the share holders want
and 
B) What the boards of directors want.

You don't just have a free reign to suit your self; if in the previous 5 years RBS had been ultra cautious and shown a small incremental year on year growth he would probably been sacked! All stake holders in RBS expected them not only to keep up with their contemporaries but outperform them; unfortunately he was left holding the baby when we had an overdue correction. If he'd retired in 2006/07, 6-12 months before the bottom fell out the market he would be remembered as a hero and the new CEO as the villian. If you had a 'golden goose' of a job and pension why would you deliberately risk it all?

Is it Fred's fault companies in the USA were selling unserviceable mortgages?

Is it Freds fault Trusts were bundling these up into almost untraceable packages and selling them on as A+ rated debt?

Is it Freds fault the Icelandic Banks and Norther Rock effectively folded?

Is it Fred's fault the GLOBAL credit market pretty much closed overnight?!

The media and public love someone to blame, unfortunately for him it's fallen as his door....one man responsible for not only the global crash but RBS' £45b bail out and thousands of people paid off?


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

I agree, I think some people really don't understand how a large public company works...

I voted NO to the Amro stuff btw... but only about another 30% of my fellow shareholders agreed with me! 

He is a scapegoat, nothing more....

:thumb:


----------



## RedUntilDead (Feb 10, 2009)

Couldn`t care less about the guy!
Hope he gets stressed as much as one of my loved ones did working for him:thumb:


----------



## Nanoman (Jan 17, 2009)

I don't think this should have been taken off him. If he'd turned around and said 'no we need to be cautious or we'll go bust' he would have been fired on the spot.

And I also think Hester is entitled to his bonus BTW.


----------



## uruk hai (Apr 5, 2009)

I have to say that I don't really get this, it makes no real difference and when you consider someone like Geffrey Archer, a convicted liar still sits in the house of lords after doing bird it makes no real sense


----------



## Shug (Jul 13, 2007)

Its a publicity/political/diversionary tactic.
Boy was still a bit of a **** tho.


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

Shug said:


> Boy was still a bit of a **** tho.


Why do you say that?!?!

Do you know him, or just going by what has been shown in the media?!?

:thumb:


----------



## PootleFlump (Jan 1, 2006)

I don't think they should have removed his knighthood, clearly he presided over a bank that made some very bad decisions but does that mean he should lose his knighthood, probably not, leave the flogging to convicted crinimals.


----------



## Brazo (Oct 27, 2005)

Well If services to banking means losing the country 45 billion, then no he shouldn't keep the title


----------



## The Cueball (Feb 8, 2007)

the point is, he never done that... 

he is a scapegoat, nothing more.... a CEO doesn't have the power to make the decisions on his own that he is being accused of... it's that simple.

:thumb:


----------



## jimmy669966 (Sep 25, 2011)

It's utter crap, he was stripped as a publicity stunt to divert blame. 

The Bank has a board of directors, independent consultants and strategists. The CEO of any company is a figurehead and can't make decisions without consultation/voting from the board and is only as good as the staff working with him and the goods they bring to the table.

I'm not the most clued up on the financial industry, so don't pretend to fully understand the whole subprime lending that lead to this, etc, etc. But it doesn't take a genius to surmise that a national bank failing can't be blamed on one person.


----------



## Goldbug (Sep 23, 2011)

Just wait till Gordon Brown is made a Lord for services to the economy. 
:doublesho


----------

