General Message Board>
Login  |  Register

Are building societies more efficient?

Endi
380 posts
Oct 07, 2008
2:54 PM
With the recent nationalisation of Bradford and Bingly, the very last of the British building societies who demutualised have at last collapsed, been swallowed up by larger institutions or been taken into public ownership to prevent them from collapsing. The old-fashioned building societies who did not demutualise aren't doing too badly despite the financial meltdown. Does that tell you anything?

Last Edited on 7-Oct-2008 2:54 PM

Pogo
623 posts
Oct 08, 2008
11:33 AM
As an American, I know nothing of building societies.
CeeBee
2254 posts
Oct 08, 2008
7:52 PM
I read up in Wikipedia on building societies, had thought they were bee or ant or termite colonies. As an American, I have no experience with and no opinion about the UK term, building societies.
Bradd
543 posts
Oct 09, 2008
6:39 PM
The UK Building Societies are essentially equivalent to the US Savings and Loan Banks.

In the 1980's these (US) banks were deregulated leading to greedy practices (write bad mortgages, collect the fees, and then sell them to Freddie and Fannie), and the subsequent notorious crash of same. The government bailed them out, costing billions, but apparently the lesson didn't take.

Precisely the same bad behavior started the crisis we find ourselves in at present. Only this time, it's much bigger. Not only has the crisis spread to banks outside the US, but it is now affecting worldwide stock markets.

All because the powerful believed in the "self-correcting" nature of markets, and were able to repeal or weaken regulations overseeing these markets. Some CEO's lost their jobs and walked away with tens and sometimes hundreds of millions of dollars in Golden Parachutes, while the ordinary homeowner is beginning to face eviction and unemployment.

Yes, Endi, it tells all of us something. Economies are not what they were in the days of Adam Smith. The "invisible hand" isn't there anymore in a global, interconnected financial system. It's way too complex to leave it to natural market corrections.

Cries of "socialism" are falling on deaf ears as the situation deteriorates daily. If and when we get over this crisis, (which will get much worse before it improves), the role of government will be essential for orderly markets as only government can provide the necessary oversight.

Last Edited on 9-Oct-2008 6:52 PM

Endi
381 posts
Oct 10, 2008
8:29 AM
Bradd, I would have added to my first post to the one about building societies I started a while back. I have the figures for British building societies from the British Building Societies Association, the first figure is the assets for April 2008, the second, Jan 2007.

Name Asset share to Apr 2008 Asset share to Jan 2007
1 Nationwide Building Society £158,660m £150,586m
2 Britannia Building Society £36,827m £32,431m
3 Yorkshire Building Society £20,498m £16,298m
4 Coventry Building Society* £14,909m £11,090m
5 Chelsea Building Society £13,087m £9,656m
6 Skipton Building Society £12,531m £9,156m
7 Leeds Building Society £9,181m £7,065m
8 West Bromwich Building Society £8,319m £7,208m
9 Derbyshire Building Society** £7,094m £5,097m
10 Principality Building Society £5,853m £4,384m
11 Cheshire Building Society** £4,976m £4,678m
12 Newcastle Building Society £4,816m £3,863m
13 Norwich & Peterborough Building Society £4,308m £3,403m
14 Dunfermline Building Society £3,303m £2,318m
15 Stroud & Swindon Building Society £3,172m £2,514m
16 Nottingham Building Society £3,026m £2,428m
17 Scarborough Building Society £2,298m £1,733m
18 Kent Reliance Building Society £2,134m £1,619m
19 Progressive Building Society* £1,495m £1,248m
20 Cumberland Building Society £1,283m £1,185m
21 National Counties Building Society £1,177m £956m
22 Furness Building Society £845m £770m
23 Cambridge Building Society £844m £751m
24 Leek United Building Society £800m £661m
25 Manchester Building Society £792m £565m
26 Saffron Building Society £784m £662m
27 Hinckley & Rugby Building Society £712m £649m
28 Darlington Building Society £689m £548m
29 Newbury Building Society £605m £565m
30 Monmouthshire Building Society £527m £485m
31 Melton Mowbray Building Society* £439m £385m
32 Market Harborough Building Society £419m £380m
33 Ipswich Building Society* £403m £321m
34 Barnsley Building Society* £376m £346m
35 Marsden Building Society £356m £343m
36 Tipton & Coseley Building Society* £350m £287m
37 Hanley Economic Building Society £341m £322m
38 Mansfield Building Society* £286m £229m
39 Teachers Building Society £271m £240m
40 Loughborough Building Society* £260m £239m
41 Chesham Building Society* £254m £196m
42 Dudley Building Society £251m £228m
43 Vernon Building Society £246m £217m
44 Scottish Building Society £221m £211m
45 Bath Investment & Building Society £190m £157m
46 Chorley & District Building Society* £160m £147m
47 Harpenden Building Society* £158m £126m
48 Holmesdale Building Society* £149m £142m
49 Stafford Railway Building Society* £148m £132m
50 Beverley Building Society* £145m £117m
51 Buckinghamshire Building Society* £139m £135m
52 Swansea Building Society £120m £95m
53 Earl Shilton Building Society* £92m £88m
54 Shepshed Building Society £86m £79m
55 Penrith Building Society* £78m £74m
56 Ecology Building Society* £75m £63m
57 Catholic Building Society* *** £44m £38m
58 City of Derry Building Society* £36m £28m
59 Century Building Society* £22m £22m

All except Century up and that's just unchanged.

Does anyone know if this reflects the current situation?

Bradd, do you know anything about the still mutual US Savings and Loan Banks?

Last Edited on 10-Oct-2008 8:37 AM

Bradd
547 posts
Oct 14, 2008
5:21 PM
Endi, the increase in assets may reflect good, conservative banking practices. Let's hope so. On the other hand, the figures may represent carrying assets on the books at face value rather than market value. That's bad. Only the banker knows for sure.

I didn't understand your second question.