Vulture Ireland


Independent TD Mick Wallace in the Dáil last week on vulture funds and real estate investment trusts (REITs)

Mick tweetz:

Vulture Funds have caused untold damage in Ireland, but they couldn’t have done so without the 100% support of the Fine Gael/Labour & FG/Ind Alliance Governments, not to mention their beautiful relationship with our friends in NAMA…

Thanks Gemma

Sponsored Link

24 thoughts on “Vulture Ireland

  1. MaryLou's ArmaLite

    A man that walked away from debts of €35,000,000

    A tax dodger.

    Disqualified from companies for 6 years.

  2. JunkFace

    Ireland needs to handle Vulture Funds like they do in Canada. Tax them heavily, but it might be too late for Ireland. The damage has already been done by Vulture funds. The fact that they paid less tax than private citizens in 2015, 2016, 2017 infuriates me!

    1. Cian

      Some of what he said was good

      Some of it was plain wrong. One of the last things he said was that NAMA was “set up to put assets into cold storage, and not sell them until the market recovers” this is simply not true. When NAMA was set up in 2009, it was given a 10-year remit to sell off *everything*. It had a repayment schedule to pay back it’s loans – so they had to start selling ASAP – effectively to sell off €7bn each year from 2012.

        1. Johnny

          Your almost as bad as Mickey d with your lying Cian.
          That’s misinformation it’s deliberate like Higgins.

          1. Johnny

            Are you a communist too ?
            You made the whole thing up like Mickey d-all lies Cian link it then or stop spreading misinformation and lies.

          2. Johnny

            Cian-NAMA issued bonds to buy the loans,there’s NO repayment schedule,none.
            You and your employer (FG?) made this up-I’m tired politicians blatantly lying and spreading misinformation,treating irish people likes dupes.
            There never was ANY repayment schedule,it’s not possible you got mixed up,NAMA is a liquidation shop and flogged all the prime assets and development sites to yanks that are now hoarding them-your on here daily spreading lies and misinformation-stop it.

            “The National Asset Management Agency pays for the loans it acquires from the five participating institutions by issuing Senior Debt securities to the value of 95% of the total consideration and Subordinated Debt securities for the remaining 5%.”

  3. anne

    In relation to NAMA, nothing Mick Wallace says about them is incorrect. Hi previous business problems is a lot of whataboutery.

    It’s a big cess pit of corruption. A big wine lake created by the state, interfering in the morket that should only be interfered with when it suits – i.e. to enrich the wealthy.

    It’s been a disaster for the property market in this country for ordinary citizens.

    1. Cian

      But if NAMA wasn’t created, the banks would[1] have been paralysed by their bad loans. They would have needed billion more to prop them up…. and/or they would have had to sell their loans piecemeal to ‘vulture funds’; you know – like they way they are selling their non-performing BTL loans?

      [1] This is conjecture on my part. But it is most likely true.

      1. Frilly Keane

        not necessarily

        Some Loans were performing, and some loans weren’t at risk at all
        but NAMA still snatched them from the Banks
        Insteada leaving them there
        and the secured assets attached to them

        You could say they took business from the Banks involved

        NAMA was rotten from day 1
        just look at who they recruited

        and tbf
        Paddy McKillen
        whatever ye think about him
        deserves a bitta credit for challenging the transfer of his loans to NAMA
        because there was no reason to
        and because they were actually performing

        1. Cian

          Yes, NAMA took the non-performing loans AND the securities on these. That is literally what a security is for.

          builder: “give me 20 million to build in this field.”
          bank: “what if you don’t pay back the money?”
          builder: “if I don’t pay it back, you can have the field and also this office block I also own and rent. it’s worth 10million”
          bank: “okay”
          …5 years later:
          bank: “you owe us 20 million”
          builder: “I don’t have it”
          bank: “we’ll keep land and the office block, so”

          Central Bank: “how’s the craic?”
          bank: “not good, we’ve lost loads of money”
          NAMA: “we’ll take all that stuff off your books”
          bank: “hurrah”

        2. Cian

          Also the banks choose what debtors to give to NAMA. They could have elected to keep a particular borrower and all their performing and non performing loans.

          what they couldn’t do was cherry-pick from developer X to keep some loans and not others.

Comments are closed.

Sponsored Link