Quinn Insurance in Administration

[supersarsfields]

Is the announcement expected today that QI will be put into permanent( if thats the trerm) administration ?

If so, what will be the implications ?

The administrators confirmed yesterday that according to Southern law a company in administration cannot be liquidated...but I suppose it can be sold??

There is no way the Government is going to liquidate a profitable company. Like QMP says they'll prob take it, run it and hope to sell QI on. The problem being that by that stage QI will have dropped in value like a stone.

[seafoid]

Quinn does only need £100M for to solve the solvency ratios which as I said yesterday were below the 150 required for Ireland. They were at approx 120%. Which is not unsafe by any measure considering in other economies the ratio needed is only 100%

That depends. Where are the assets of the company invested? If they are in the equivalent of horse number 4 in the 3.15 at Lingfield
100% is not sufficient.

The other question is what calls there are on the assets allocated to solvency.   

[supersarsfields]

Indeed, I'm only pointing out that only £100m of that is to cover the solvency ratio to bring it back up to the required 150% rate (It's this rate regardless of were the assests are invested).

[A Quinn Martin Production]

supersarsfields...would you agree that if anyone is to "blame" for this situation then it is Sean Quinn??

[boojangles]

Quinn does only need £100M for to solve the solvency ratios which as I said yesterday were below the 150 required for Ireland. They were at approx 120%. Which is not unsafe by any measure considering in other economies the ratio needed is only 100%

That depends. Where are the assets of the company invested? If they are in the equivalent of horse number 4 in the 3.15 at Lingfield
100% is not sufficient.
The other question is what calls there are on the assets allocated to solvency.   

Em I think everybody knows that,sure isn't that what the whole fuss is over. Would it not make sense for the Government to loan QIL the 100 or so Million needed to meet the solvency ratio? Its a profitable business which can pay it back.

[supersarsfields]

Why you asking me that? 

I'd say that I believe he fell under his solvency rates for Ireland and I suppose he has to shoulder the blame for that. And the risks he took with Anglo.
But I don't believe the best way out of this was putting the business into adminstration. When Quinn was in charge he was running a profitable ship, and was paying of the debt that he owed. My view is that had the regulator worked with QI, put in measures to prevent the solvency rates falling below 150 again and continued to allow him to pay of his debt then this would have been the best option for the economy, his employees, SQ himself and for the government.

Now with what has happened there is a fair chance QI will be ruined, jobs lost and SQ left with no way of paying the debt of.

Now do you believe the regulators worked in the best interest of the economy as a whole including jobs, debts etc or could they have followed a less aggressive tactic in reaching an agreement? 

[Declan]

Wonder will the regulator now go after VHI??
Tthey've always been (technically) insolvent and the regulator has turned a blind eye as it's mainly because the government owns them.
Theirs is due to a general incompetence / inability to face up to the consultants rather than covertly covering some fellas gambling debts !

[A Quinn Martin Production]

Why you asking me that? 

I'd say that I believe he fell under his solvency rates for Ireland and I suppose he has to shoulder the blame for that. And the risks he took with Anglo.
But I don't believe the best way out of this was putting the business into adminstration. When Quinn was in charge he was running a profitable ship, and was paying of the debt that he owed. My view is that had the regulator worked with QI, put in measures to prevent the solvency rates falling below 150 again and continued to allow him to pay of his debt then this would have been the best option for the economy, his employees, SQ himself and for the government.

Now with what has happened there is a fair chance QI will be ruined, jobs lost and SQ left with no way of paying the debt of.

Now do you believe the regulators worked in the best interest of the economy as a whole including jobs, debts etc or could they have followed a less aggressive tactic in reaching an agreement?

Maybe if QI had worked with the Regulator....

I can agree with a lot of what you say ss, but QI has previous in this field and the main aggression I see in the whole situation was SQ's agressive pursuit of what??...money, power, ego...with Anglo. 

My position is this...I have total sympathy with the employees, I hope a resolution is found that protects all the jobs.  The Group is so big in this area it cannot be allowed to fail, it is as important to the local economy here as any bank is to the national interest.  Therefore I am actually in favour of some intervention/bail out.  But what irks me is the rush to lionise SQ when it is clear his actions have brought the Group to its knees. 

Just my €700mill worth...or is it 100mill or 150 mill

[mick999]

Wonder will the regulator now go after VHI??
Tthey've always been (technically) insolvent and the regulator has turned a blind eye as it's mainly because the government owns them.
Theirs is due to a general incompetence / inability to face up to the consultants rather than covertly covering some fellas gambling debts !

The regulator can't go after the VHI ..

It's not within his remit yet ....  http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2010/0120/1224262715137.html

Lots more discussion on Quinn here : http://www.politics.ie/economy/127508-anglo-quinnish-bankinsurance-aka-quanglo-16.html

[seafoid]

Why you asking me that? 

My view is that had the regulator worked with QI, put in measures to prevent the solvency rates falling below 150 again and continued to allow him to pay of his debt then this would have been the best option for the economy, his employees, SQ himself and for the government.

Quinn and the regulator had previously agreed on a plan whereby QI would limit the amount of lossmaking business it wrote in the UK but Quinn subsequently ignored this. I have the feeling Quinn thought he could do whatever he wanted regulation wise.   

[supersarsfields]

Why you asking me that? 

I'd say that I believe he fell under his solvency rates for Ireland and I suppose he has to shoulder the blame for that. And the risks he took with Anglo.
But I don't believe the best way out of this was putting the business into adminstration. When Quinn was in charge he was running a profitable ship, and was paying of the debt that he owed. My view is that had the regulator worked with QI, put in measures to prevent the solvency rates falling below 150 again and continued to allow him to pay of his debt then this would have been the best option for the economy, his employees, SQ himself and for the government.

Now with what has happened there is a fair chance QI will be ruined, jobs lost and SQ left with no way of paying the debt of.

Now do you believe the regulators worked in the best interest of the economy as a whole including jobs, debts etc or could they have followed a less aggressive tactic in reaching an agreement?

Maybe if QI had worked with the Regulator....

I can agree with a lot of what you say ss, but QI has previous in this field and the main aggression I see in the whole situation was SQ's agressive pursuit of what??...money, power, ego...with Anglo. 

My position is this...I have total sympathy with the employees, I hope a resolution is found that protects all the jobs.  The Group is so big in this area it cannot be allowed to fail, it is as important to the local economy here as any bank is to the national interest.  Therefore I am actually in favour of some intervention/bail out.  But what irks me is the rush to lionise SQ when it is clear his actions have brought the Group to its knees. 

Just my €700mill worth...or is it 100mill or 150 mill

I wouldn't be rushing to lionise him either, but considering he is in a position to pay of his debts (Unlike others who have just folded and left Anglo with the debt) and the fact that he has been loyal to the area with regards to saving jobs, keeping the work in Ireland etc they could have come to an arrangement. Remember the regulator put QI into provisional adminstration without allowing QG a chance to counter or even be at the hearing. True they are "techinially" right  but was it the best way of sorting out the mess? Surely a solution that allows the debt to be paid over time while maintaining employment and putting safe guards in place to deal with the solvency issues would be better to the alternative.   

[boojangles]

Why you asking me that? 

My view is that had the regulator worked with QI, put in measures to prevent the solvency rates falling below 150 again and continued to allow him to pay of his debt then this would have been the best option for the economy, his employees, SQ himself and for the government.

Quinn and the regulator had previously agreed on a plan whereby QI would limit the amount of lossmaking business it wrote in the UK but Quinn subsequently ignored this. I have the feeling Quinn thought he could do whatever he wanted regulation wise.

You have a feeling?
I have a feeling some people are just glad to watch a home grown Billionaire, who did more than any of us could ever to do for this economy,fall on his knees.
He loaned some of his subsidaries money that weren't doing as well as others. Thats going on everywhere,just on a smaller scale. He never broke any laws. Some people should remember that.
He took unprecedented gambles as regards Anglo-Irish but by heck is he going to pay for it.

[Bogball XV]

Wonder will the regulator now go after VHI??
Tthey've always been (technically) insolvent and the regulator has turned a blind eye as it's mainly because the government owns them.

is that not the point though, since they're state owned they're only insolvent if the state is insolvent and that would never happen

[muppet]

Maybe if QI had worked with the Regulator....

I can agree with a lot of what you say ss, but QI has previous in this field and the main aggression I see in the whole situation was SQ's agressive pursuit of what??...money, power, ego...with Anglo. 

My position is this...I have total sympathy with the employees, I hope a resolution is found that protects all the jobs.  The Group is so big in this area it cannot be allowed to fail, it is as important to the local economy here as any bank is to the national interest.  Therefore I am actually in favour of some intervention/bail out.  But what irks me is the rush to lionise SQ when it is clear his actions have brought the Group to its knees. 

Just my €700mill worth...or is it 100mill or 150 mill

Good post.

[seafoid]

Why you asking me that? 

My view is that had the regulator worked with QI, put in measures to prevent the solvency rates falling below 150 again and continued to allow him to pay of his debt then this would have been the best option for the economy, his employees, SQ himself and for the government.

Quinn and the regulator had previously agreed on a plan whereby QI would limit the amount of lossmaking business it wrote in the UK but Quinn subsequently ignored this. I have the feeling Quinn thought he could do whatever he wanted regulation wise.

You have a feeling? I have a feeling some people are just glad to watch a home grown Billionaire, who did more than any of us could ever to do for this economy,fall on his knees. He loaned some of his subsidaries money that weren't doing as well as others. Thats going on everywhere,just on a smaller scale. He never broke any laws. Some people should remember that.
He took unprecedented gambles as regards Anglo-Irish but by heck is he going to pay for it.

He ran the insurance company like a cowboy. He let his employees down. He got caught out regulator wise. He probably thought Neary would continue ad infinitum. He cut a deal with the regulator and subsequently broke it. It's not a witch hunt. This is how regulation is supposed to work.

If the business is solid then what's the worry ? If average salaries are around 20,000€ aren't the jobs likely to stay in borderestan ?