<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.1" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Is it just me…</title>
	<link>http://dublinopinion.com/2009/08/24/is-it-just-me%e2%80%a6/</link>
	<description>It's a group blog. What more do you need to know?</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 23 May 2012 13:56:50 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.1</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Donagh</title>
		<link>http://dublinopinion.com/2009/08/24/is-it-just-me%e2%80%a6/#comment-70697</link>
		<author>Donagh</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:52:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://dublinopinion.com/2009/08/24/is-it-just-me%e2%80%a6/#comment-70697</guid>
		<description>Well that was what I was wondering. Is the judgement really based on the new evidence, like the valuation? I don't believe it is. Perhaps what is of more significance is the decision of the other banks (basically AIB and BoI) to say that they'll support Carroll no matter what. It is in their interests to forstall action being taken by ACC. ACC of course have less to lose in terms of the drop in the asset price that liquidation would bring about, but the Irish banks have everything to lose if those assets are dumped on the market before NAMA can buy them up. There's a good change that it would affect the price that NAMA pays for the assets on their books. This stuff about a 'the long term economic' value that is supposed to be calculated is basically the smallest amount of discount that they think they can get away with. There is huge public opposition to NAMA growing. If Carroll's assets go on firesale and NAMA prices don't reflect this there will be a proper shit storm. 

So the judgement to allow a second crack was political - or at least takes a lot of the above in to account. But what will the judge's decision on the second application be based on?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well that was what I was wondering. Is the judgement really based on the new evidence, like the valuation? I don&#8217;t believe it is. Perhaps what is of more significance is the decision of the other banks (basically AIB and BoI) to say that they&#8217;ll support Carroll no matter what. It is in their interests to forstall action being taken by ACC. ACC of course have less to lose in terms of the drop in the asset price that liquidation would bring about, but the Irish banks have everything to lose if those assets are dumped on the market before NAMA can buy them up. There&#8217;s a good change that it would affect the price that NAMA pays for the assets on their books. This stuff about a &#8216;the long term economic&#8217; value that is supposed to be calculated is basically the smallest amount of discount that they think they can get away with. There is huge public opposition to NAMA growing. If Carroll&#8217;s assets go on firesale and NAMA prices don&#8217;t reflect this there will be a proper shit storm. </p>
<p>So the judgement to allow a second crack was political - or at least takes a lot of the above in to account. But what will the judge&#8217;s decision on the second application be based on?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donal</title>
		<link>http://dublinopinion.com/2009/08/24/is-it-just-me%e2%80%a6/#comment-70694</link>
		<author>Donal</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:29:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://dublinopinion.com/2009/08/24/is-it-just-me%e2%80%a6/#comment-70694</guid>
		<description>It's not just you Donagh. I went on holidays thinking this had all been wrapped up only to return to a sequel. RTE keep refering to the decision to have another crack at the examiner process as "unprecidented" in the history of the state, without really scrutinising why the court saw it fit to break precident.

The stakes here are very high, if ACC win in a timely fashion and Carrolls assets are released on the current market the resultant fire-sale will scare the bejaysus out of the galway refugee tent.

Sometimes if the only possible reason for a judicial delay seems political (so as not to cut NAMA off at the knees) then as Poirot says: The impossible must be possible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s not just you Donagh. I went on holidays thinking this had all been wrapped up only to return to a sequel. RTE keep refering to the decision to have another crack at the examiner process as &#8220;unprecidented&#8221; in the history of the state, without really scrutinising why the court saw it fit to break precident.</p>
<p>The stakes here are very high, if ACC win in a timely fashion and Carrolls assets are released on the current market the resultant fire-sale will scare the bejaysus out of the galway refugee tent.</p>
<p>Sometimes if the only possible reason for a judicial delay seems political (so as not to cut NAMA off at the knees) then as Poirot says: The impossible must be possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eoin O'Mahony</title>
		<link>http://dublinopinion.com/2009/08/24/is-it-just-me%e2%80%a6/#comment-70688</link>
		<author>Eoin O'Mahony</author>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Aug 2009 09:12:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://dublinopinion.com/2009/08/24/is-it-just-me%e2%80%a6/#comment-70688</guid>
		<description>Can other loan defaulters expect the same treatment?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Can other loan defaulters expect the same treatment?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

