Wednesday, 25 November 2015

self-reflection after watching the financial documentary: the RBS Inside the Bank That Ran Out of Money

In most people’s eyes, the Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) was once a famous Scottish institution in the past twenty year; it was a bank with a reputation for prudence, even sometimes people considered it as the best bank than any British bank. Specially, when Fred Goodwin became their leader; under his leadership and operational strategy which was aimed at entering into the US market, the biggest investment market all over the world and striving for the status of dominance, the RBS began to develop at higher speed and soon it got prosperous. Giving all investors surprises, every day is not Sunday. But in October 2008, less than a decade after Fred Goodwin took over as chief executive, it came within hours of collapsing. The RBS later posted their biggest loss in UK corporate history (24 billion pounds) which damaged the bank's reputation for financial prudence and Scotland's image as a global financial center.

According to the previously unbroadcasted footage of the bank's top executives and interviews with bank insiders, I learn the compelling story of a national catastrophe deeply. When we refer to the financial crisis in 2008, we all remember the dilemmas in the most industries of the world, too many people lost their job and they might be hurt by this crisis. In fact, the financial crisis came from the subprime lending crisis in us. Saying more clearly, in micro-level, it was a crisis of the corporate governance. These weaknesses in the banking industry reflect as follows:
Firstly, the internal defects; 
1) There was not a sound governance from the board of banks. For example, because the comprise of the board mostly was the current and former managers, Citi Group's board of directors was considered to be an insufficiency of objectivity and independence
2) There existed an unreasonable structure of shareholders. Such as the Bank of America, the first biggest shareholder held only about 4%; by contrast, the first biggest shareholders holding the shares of the Citi Bank was only about 5%.
3) There was some asymmetric incentives for executives. In the crisis, for example, the CEO of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae who were required to leave could still get severance payment of $9.3 million and $14.1 million relatively.
4) There was low information transparence.

On the other hand, the shortages of external regulatory.
1)    Government had poor supervision.
2)    The existence of inadequate legal mechanisms in U.S. market. Until 2000, many protective systems in the U.S. financial sector had been revoked which set the potential problem to the crisis.
3)    Rating agencies were not independent. In U.S market, it was very common that a rating agency which could give the highest rating to the issued securities, the issuer would hire whose service, so that credit rating agencies had the tendency to grading high marks.

As for Chinese banking industry, they have a lot of things to learn and improve. Owing to the governmental level is lower than America, we need to take warning from the financial crisis in western countries. Moreover, all banks in the world should take a joint effort to push the Basel 3 into practice more quickly. Meanwhile, taking some adjustments with the development of the global economy and faced with any difficulties, we should take some timely and positive solutions.

No comments:

Post a Comment