₦airaland Forum

deenee:
Thank you for the response. However, I think that is expedient to understand what has transpired during the whole deal whilst opining that the analogy you have used re the nationalised banks does not add up. These banks were nationalised because even with the fresh injection of funds, there were still ‘ regular borrowers via the CBN ‘extended discount window’ and no ‘rational investor’ would touch them with a ten foot pole. More so, allowing them to become bankrupt (which is what would have happened if they were not nationalised) will just send another round of  ‘shock waves’ through the entire financial system and jeopardise the possible acquisition or merger talks underway.

There is also one misconception that I would like to correct here, the funds used in this regard is not ‘tax payers’  money as you and most people connote.  Funds have been provided via the CBN( lender of last resort) through AMCON ( a special purpose vehicle) and in the form of debt. Intercontinental and others still have negative shareholders’ funds in ‘retrospect’ because of the non-performing loans at their disposal, hence saying that their balance sheet has been “cleaned out” is intrinsically incorrect. They have merely transferred the NPLs  which will be recovered at a later date to AMCON and AMCON has issued out debt coupons to them funded by the CBN. The intention in the medium term is to assign ‘ratings’ to these tranched securitised non-performing assets (which will be determined by their recovery rate thus, loans that have the  propensity to be repaid ‘quickly’ are rated higher  and vice versa), purchased by AMCON and make them tradable as ‘convertible debt instruments’ via the capital markets to the  investing public. When this is done, then we can say that ‘tax payers’ money is involved. To the best  of my knowledge, this has not been the case.

Also Intercontinental, like other ‘distressed’ banks have no ‘liabilities’ just assets and non-performing assets for that matter. At this point it is vital to reiterate that our definition of assets and  liability ‘accounting wise’ is  quite different from the way it is used here. In this context and as indicated  in the balance sheet of banks and other financial institutions, ‘liabilities’ refer to the different classes of funds sourced by the bank via savings and current accounts and fixed deposits; all which have varying cost of funds and tenors. They are termed ‘liabilities’ because the bank has a ‘moral obligation’ to make the funds attached to them available on demand- hence the reason why you can deposit your money and withdraw at ease and on demand (except, there is a liquidity crisis where assets are more than liabilities). It is also from these pooled class of liabilities that banks create ‘assets’-loans and advances of different classes ranging from the ‘ubiquitous’ overdraft to syndicated loans- arranged by different banks and where one bank is the lead financier. At the’ point of sale’ or during the transaction implementation process, Intercontinental had more non-performing assets than liabilities hence the hole you have described herein and a very BIG one for that matter!

You also say that they should sell their buildings- who will buy them? Who has purchased the building of hitherto distressed banks like Liberty, the defunct National bank, All States Trust and others?  AMCON is not ‘Father Xmas’, so saying that AMCON has paid off the ‘liabilities’ (which should be called ‘assets’ in this regard) is a statement that should be given some afterthought! AMCON has only filled the ‘hole’ created by bad management/corporate governance at Intercontinental et al. and this has just been done temporarily. Have you bothered to ask yourself why the nationalised banks didn’t attract any investors?

Finally, Intercontinental is not ‘great’ again as put forward by you simply because the 550b non performing loans have be transferred to AMCON. What will make then great again is if they are able to make ‘real profit’, sustain it ,reward investors/ shareholders accordingly and trade at a reasonable market price. More so, the injection has only made the bank a ‘tenable investment worthy of consideration’ and 50b, paid by Access is perhaps the best offer it could get based on the current valuation (market price of stock on the exchange and assets-bear in mind that these ‘assets’-building et al. depreciate and lose their value as they ‘wear and tear’ whilst some are not even marketable) and a lot of other extenuating factors. But then again, this is a topic of discussion for another day!

jobaskia:
Which ever way we all are looking at it. It' s basically hostile takeover not merger in the real sense of it.

goggs:
What if you buy a salvaged car  for N1m (cos the dealer tricked you into believing it was sound) and after a month you discover a mountain of problems that reveals the car is a right off, would you still sell it for N1.5? or N1m or for the true value of its worth (eg N.1m). Or would you trick someone else and sell for N1.2m cos your friend will condemn you if they found you got tricked. Get real man

The hole in Intercontinental bank is huge and the investment by AMCON maybe just enough to keep it afloat. What ever is pumpe in must be view relative to the size of the negative capital it has.

deenee:
The whole merger  process is very valid. There is one point that we are all missing here; what is the current market price of Intercontinental shares now vis-a vis three years ago?

The price that Access will pay for the stake acquired in Intercontinental will be by and large determined by the current market price obtainable, hence if we are to go by this, Intercontinental would be sold for 'peanuts' compared with what what Access has put on the table! I am sure you will all agree that Intercontinental, like most other banks are trading at an all-time low. Also, the stake provided herein by AMCON cannot be converted ‘equity’ as some as suggested herein as it is meant to be a 'provisional investment' meant to create liquidity which has dried up due to the large number of NPLs most of these banks presently have in their books!

This situation is further exacerbated by the fact that a lot of ‘fictitious accounting’ had been going at Intercontinental and apparently, they actually have a negative balance sheet and even negative shareholders’ funds as a result of the mismatch between assets created and liabilities sourced vis-a vis the tenor of the liabilities and the repayment periods for the assets that they have been used to create. Furthermore, AMCON is not a licensed to carry out ‘bank services’ but rather, is a special purpose vehicle created by the government and enacted by law to buy up non-performing loans in banks hereby creating  ‘liquidity’ which is needed in the financial markets now.

So, what AMCON has done is to ensure that Intercontinental is an ‘attractive asset’ to discerning investors. There is no need evidently, to shed some ‘light’ on the technical details of the whole ‘transaction implementation process’ used for the deal because apparently , a lot of people are still trying to get their heads around the  ‘overall concept’

More so, I am appalled to see people comment here, that nationalized banks in the UK are making profit, which profit and where is the evidence to back up this claim? The banks that have been nationalised in the UK (top of the list include RBS and Lloyds TSB) are still making huge losses and there are massive redundancies there!  See link below to support my claim. The funds injected into the deal by AMCON will be repaid by the new owners once there is enough liquidity and the capital adequacy requirements as stipulated by the CBN has be met.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/53bc5744-be68-11e0-ab21-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1aeY89vxe

sulad82i:
The attached picture/slide cannot tell the whole deal that went into the merger but it obviously gets the wrong attention from some people who do not understand the business aspect of the deal.
A company with a controlling interest in the daily activity of the business does not always have the highest share of profit and loss and vice versa. As someone said in one of the preceding post, the buyer might not be in the same business but see the business as a "cash cow" -- meaning the business is very profitable to the investor-- but do not want to be involved in daily activities. So it makes business sense to invest in such business while someone else with little contribution is allowed to make the daily decisions. Sometimes, the ability to make decision in the firm can only be done by the party with the largest share or the largest controlling interest as determined by the shareholders/joint venture owners.

The picture above does not tell the whole story and that’s why my first response only addresses the legal aspect of it.

A major example is with Apple Inc. co-found by the late Steve Jobs, we all know that the man has the idea of what to provide for the consumers, but he also has some masters behind the door who are responsible for the needed funds. Just so you know too, his interest in Apple Inc. is not as much as his interest in Pixar
Another example is Elun Musk, he's the co-founder of Paypal and Tesla Motors but was eventually forced out of those 2 businesses by the major parties before co-founding Space-X.

sulad82i:
The attached picture/slide cannot tell the whole deal that went into the merger but it obviously gets the wrong attention from some people who do not understand the business aspect of the deal.
A company with a controlling interest in the daily activity of the business does not always have the highest share of profit and loss and vice versa. As someone said in one of the preceding post, the buyer might not be in the same business but see the business as a "cash cow" -- meaning the business is very profitable to the investor-- but do not want to be involved in daily activities. So it makes business sense to invest in such business while someone else with little contribution is allowed to make the daily decisions. Sometimes, the ability to make decision in the firm can only be done by the party with the largest share or the largest controlling interest as determined by the shareholders/joint venture owners.

The picture above does not tell the whole story and that’s why my first response only addresses the legal aspect of it.

A major example is with Apple Inc. co-found by the late Steve Jobs, we all know that the man has the idea of what to provide for the consumers, but he also has some masters behind the door who are responsible for the needed funds. Just so you know too, his interest in Apple Inc. is not as much as his interest in Pixar
Another example is Elun Musk, he's the co-founder of Paypal and Tesla Motors but was eventually forced out of those 2 businesses by the major parties before co-founding Space-X.

debosky:
^^ Simply put, they want to benefit from the skills of workers for a fixed period of time without giving them the right to settle permanently. By removing the automatic right to permanent settlement, they hope to limit the number of skilled workers (and dependants) remaining in the UK beyond a fixed period.

It is partly driven by the recession - whenever there are job losses, the natural tendency is to tighten up the rules to prevent abuses and to benefit the local population first. More importantly though, it is aimed at ensuring that immigration levels are lower in the long term and closer matched to the UK's needs and not just an automatic process.

justwise:
Vicjustice has given you one possible outcome but you can still be issued the visa with the hope that you may use it in future since the delay wasn't necessarily your fault.

justwise:
Well. . .sadly UKBA did not see Nigeria like that, but for masters u wouldn't need to write the test though your school will confirm that in the CAS

worry246:
New requirements here

http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/studyingintheuk/adult-students/can-you-apply/english-language/

Requirements are much stricter and just going to school in Nigeria is no longer enough.

onyiilady:
A friend of mine has a baby though she's not married to the father who has been a US citizen for over 19 years. The baby was born in Nigeria and live in Nigeria with the mom at the moment. The father of the baby have filled for her papers in the US and he's at the stage where documents
(Like school fees receipts,birth certificate -whatever that includes his name as the father)are needed to prove paternity. My question is: what will be given to this baby, greencard or citizenship? What is the procedure for citizenship application? The child in question is 3 now.

amykelly:
Hi my fellow Nairalanders, please i would like to find out the best way to give birth in America and the cost. My friend who is a Nigerian citizen and her husband is a Nigerian citizen wants to have her baby in the US. Any information will be helpful.


Additional information---

She had a miscarriage just before she got pregnant again and was told her wombing lining hasnt healed yet thus her reason for wanting to go abroad.
Also, she is four months pregnant.

Is it better for her to apply for a visiting visa
or medicare?

Sorry, there is nothing like applying for medicare. Your friends need to get a B2 visa, which entitles them to medical treatment here. Should she disclose her intention at the foreign visa post, they would have any issues crossing the border. But if she says her trip is for pleasure and gets bumped up at the border, they can actually deport her. This just happened recently.

She can be lucky though as I have seen hundreds of folks cross over successfully



And what is the best way to go about this ??

akin707:
pls house l have a challenge, l am to go to the uk on saturday, l want to know if it will be most appropriate if l can take dollar along wen am going, and change it to pounds wen l get to the uk?

duduspace:
@bluecole2

Why not just declare statelessness? If the Nigerian embassy is refusing to give you a passport why not obtain some legal advice to ascertain what your options are? You would become a protected person of the crown by virtue of your stateless status.

Based on what you say, yu've never had a Nigerian passport and yu've always lived in the UK after being brought in illegally as a child. If you came in on your parent's passport I think that makes you stateless if yu've been refused one by the Nigerian embassy or if by dint of circumstances outside your control you cannot produce what they've requested.

If you can get a letter from them detailing what they've requested and are able to show that yu're unable to obtain it legally then you have a solid basis to declare statelessness or if you get a legal representative to communicate with the embassy on your behalf so that you have documentary evidence of your efforts at obtaining one.

omobaba80:
Please house, am in total mess, am pregnant for my fiance and our wedding will b coming up by august, we've already done the traditional.
I can't keep this baby for now for so many reasons, please, what can I do? it's already 6weeks old
Please, holier dan thou, do not say anything here, I need matured responses from people who understand, thx

SlimHealth:
Yes there's more to it. Under normal circumstances, the female focal place tract is acidic, to help maintain hygiene. But secretions from the various glands are mainly alkaline. We now know that all cells in the body, including the sperm cells, and especially the Y-chromosome sperms, survive better under alkaline conditions. So the more alkaline the female tract is, the greater the chances of Y sperms surviving better and producing male children, since they swim faster towards the egg.

Female glandular secretions are produced most copiously when they are sexually excited. So if you want male children to result from copulation, give your woman a superlative sexual experience. The more intensely excited and sexually satisfied she is, the more she'll produce lots of 'wetness' which will in turn alter the pH of her reproductive tract from acidic to alkaline, allowing the Y sperm to survive better and do the job.

skelemba:
Thx for all your help, its been very enlightenin. Rather expensive I supose. Is there a fee to obtain the baby passport and are there offices in everystate to get both the baby use and nigerian passport. Thanx

Shinatu:
@Dancewith

Thanks. Please, do you know if the $7,999 was for the hospital delivery alone or for both the Doctor (Antinatal care) and delivery?



Hi.

unfortunately I do not know which was the case but I would suppose this amount is for all. But I am not certain of this. I still think you should go to Texas or Delaware if cost is an issue for you

Good luck

Arlington:
My advice is come with lots of cash because things change everyday! A hospital I was told took 5 to 7 thousand on getting there with the patient who was to have her baby we where told it was 12k just for a deposit.

And especially Nigerians they want your passport details because we are known for running away after child birth. we went to about 4 to 5 hospitals and the cheapest in Maryland was going to cost about 10 to 12 grand.
Please note she must bring along her hospital records and must be in the country before she hit the 32ND week in pregnancy because after then it becomes harder to get a doctor who will see her.
There is a doctor in Holycross hospital in Maryland called Dr Mayan i think he is the only one i know who takes women even at 36 weeks as long as you pay 3,500 just for all the tests alone to be sure the patient is in good health, then you pay him 3,500 for delivery, then you pay the hospital there own fees which is like another 4 to 6 k so still looking at 12k.

Getting the passport is easy after the baby is born the hospital send in the papers so you get THE baby's SS number then you apply for his/her Birth certificate ,then passport you can expedite. The Nigerian passport maybe the difficult one because it could take up to 3 weeks. Make sure you pay every penny because i know of a woman who did Naija style escaped many years ago and today she can not enter into the USA and she is paying about 300 dollars a month now to cover the expenses she incurred years ago for 2 children that where born here a long time ago.

demi2008:
@dancewith do u know d name of the hospital on MD