not a third if my maths is as good as it was
Daily mail I won't even click,
Times - if you read teh article it clearly states teh aims,
to not be at the back of teh Q as that is where expensive funding lies...
to maintain its commercial independance
to align itself with its Global vision ( this is sometning I've seen a lot longer than mosta s its been the driver and focus of all change within the bank for some time )
So is having 30% of your company owned by a small number of investers a bad thing? Not according to history. Does it expose Barclays to any risks? what impact and risks and control would having UK GOV as a maor shareholder bring to the table?
These are highly complex and controversial decisions. As an employee do I think they did teh right thing? Absolutely and so do the vast majority of my colleagues that I've spoken to.
RBS 52 week high 427
Barclays 52 week high 524
RBS today 12.8
Barclays today 73
Suggests more confidence in private finance than goverment