Rebirth of the Strongest Tycoon

When Xia Yu was in Hong Kong to build the financial market, the British banking market was undergoing tremendous changes.

The three big players caught in the Latin American sovereign debt crisis have been saving themselves, and the British government is also doing its best to help resolve the crisis.

But Barclays, National Westminster Bank and HSBC are in very different situations.

The one in the best position is National Westminster Bank, which is not far behind the largest bank Barclays, but its debt is about three-fifths of Barclays.

The old-fashioned family behind the National Westminster Bank alone is definitely not the opponent of the Rothschild family, but together, in the UK, they are no weaker than the Rothschild family, and they have the most ways to save themselves. The relationship is also the deepest.

The second best position is not HSBC Holdings, but Barclays Bank, which has the most crisis debts.

Barclays Bank has the largest amount of debt and the greatest risk, but the Rothschild family is too powerful, and has been constantly raising funds, changing tricks to deal with the run-off.

Although the Bright Fund has been manipulating public opinion behind the scenes, as time passed, Barclays Bank kept taking out cash for depositors to withdraw money. Over time, the panic of depositors gradually dissipated.

Therefore, after the market value of Barclays Bank fell below 4 billion pounds, although the market value is still shrinking, the rate of decline has slowed down significantly.

It's just that Barclays has also been selling assets and allowing depositors to withdraw funds, resulting in a decrease of more than 10 billion US dollars in total bank assets.

HSBC Holdings is in the worst situation. The reason is actually very simple. First, Latin America has less debt but accounts for a large proportion of bank assets. Second, the strength of shareholders behind the scenes is not as strong as Barclays Bank and National Westminster Bank.

HSBC holds US$6.94 billion in sovereign debt and lent more than US$7.53 billion to companies in Latin America and other countries, totaling US$14.47 billion, less than Barclays. Six floors of the bank, about $1.6 billion less than the National Westminster Bank.

But before the crisis, HSBC Holdings had total bank assets of just over US$57.13 billion and total deposits of around US$53.4 billion.

The total bank assets are equivalent to about 65% of the National Westminster Bank, and the total deposits are equivalent to about 66% of the National Westminster Bank.

But at 25.3 percent of the bank's total assets, risky debt is 1.5 percent less than Barclays' 26.8 percent.

This is not more serious.

HSBC UK is the parent company of HSBC Hong Kong, which is the core subsidiary of HSBC, occupying more than four floors of HSBC's total assets.

However, the sovereign debt and risky loans held by HSBC Hong Kong only account for less than two layers of British HSBC Holdings.

Calculated if the debt and assets of HSBC were stripped away.

The risk debt ratio of HSBC UK has reached an astonishing 40%!

Far more than Barclays' National Westminster Bank!

This kind of insider data is something that HSBC Holdings UK desperately wants to hide.

But who made the Bright Fund one of the shareholders of HSBC Holdings in the United Kingdom? George Berkeley also calculated secretly. Naturally, people have already figured out the situation, and secretly ordered people to send these secret data to non-Bright newspapers. There.

Therefore, after the exposure of the secret data, HSBC Holdings fell into dire straits and became the largest bank closest to bankruptcy.

The British government spent the greatest effort to support HSBC Holdings, and the major shareholders behind the bank were also forced to rescue them with all their might.

But even so, it still cannot prevent the rapid loss of HSBC Holdings' assets.

The total assets of HSBC Holdings have fallen below 50 billion US dollars, which makes the risk-liability ratio of HSBC Holdings in the UK reached more than 55%, excluding Hong Kong HSBC Bank.

Even without bankruptcy, HSBC Holdings has become a junk stock,

The market value has shrunk extremely seriously. From the original market value of more than 4.3 billion pounds before the crisis, it has fallen directly below one billion pounds.

But the stock is still unpopular.

The risk of bankruptcy is simply too great.

At this time, more than 3,000 banks around the world were involved in the sovereign debt crisis in Latin America, and few big banks in Europe and America escaped.

For example, among the four major banks in the UK, only Lloyds Bank was lucky enough to escape, and the assets of other banks were less than one, and it was too late to hide from HSBC Holdings.

Lloyds Bank, which survived the disaster, also did not dare to jump into the pit.

To take over, it is also to grab some high-quality assets after HSBC Holdings really goes bankrupt.

But what makes many people dumbfounded is that there are people who are really tough and dare to take over HSBC Holdings.

That's the Bright Fund, one of the UK's largest financial institutions!

In the beginning, the Bright Fund was just looking for HSBC stocks that no one bought in the stock market, and no one noticed.

Moreover, Bright Fund itself is a shareholder and director of HSBC Holdings, and there is no need to disclose the increase in shares.

It was not until the Bright Fund absorbed more than 30% of the equity in the stock market within two days and increased its shareholding ratio to more than 35% that it was found out by the agency and caused heated discussions.

But HSBC's share price is also not up.

Because when George Berkeley did not mobilize media resources to create positive public opinion, public opinion was generally not optimistic about the actions of the Bright Fund.

That's exactly what George Berkeley wanted.

He went directly to Margaret Thatcher, and after some negotiation, he won the strong support of the British government.

Then, with the help of the British government, he found the shareholders of HSBC Holdings who had not yet sold their shares.

It's not that these shareholders don't want to sell their shares. They are also worried that the bank will be implicated in tens of billions of dollars in debt after the bank goes bankrupt, and other assets of the family will also be put into it.

But these big shareholders are all under the watchful eye of the British government, which prohibits them from selling shares that make the situation worse, and also allows them to raise funds to maintain HSBC's capital chain.

This makes these shareholders envious of those institutions with scattered shares and small holdings, but also miserable.

Now the British government has lifted the ban on them, allowing them to privately transfer their shares to the Bright Fund, all of them agree, and they must be transferred according to real-time share price parity.

As for the premium?

No one dared to mention it. After all, if they were to sell the stock from the stock market, it would definitely be enough to crash the stock price again, and they would not be able to sell all the equity.

Now that it can be transferred at a par, it is a very high requirement.

It's just that George Berkeley is not stupid. He seized the opportunity to press down the price hard, and these shareholders had to pinch their noses to agree. In the end, all the shares were added up and bought at an average of 92% off the current price.

Subsequently, with the assistance of the China Securities Regulatory Commission, Bright Fund quickly completed its privatization.

The entire operation cost a total of 784.26 million pounds before and after the crisis, and bought HSBC Holdings, which had a market value of more than 4.66 billion pounds before the crisis broke out.

The whole process took only 18 days!

The high efficiency is eye-popping.

However, as HSBC Holdings is wholly-owned by Bright Fund, this also means that more than 10 billion US dollars of risky debt is also shrouded in Bright Fund.

Once HSBC Holdings goes bankrupt, the parent company, Bright Fund, will have to fill in the assets.

This has also caused investors of some private or public funds opened by Bright Fund to be worried, and some people are even ready to redeem their funds, so as not to be dragged down by Bright Fund.

However, George Berkeley was not panicked. He had considered this for a long time, so he had already applied for help from Xia Yu, and it was only after Xia Yu's instructions that he dared to go to Margaret Thatcher to make a major commitment.

On the second day after Bright Fund wholly owned HSBC Holdings, Bright Fund held a press conference jointly with HSBC Holdings and the Governor of the Bank of England. The whole press conference was broadcast live by the BBC.

At the press conference, George Berkeley announced that the shareholders of the company raised 10 billion U.S. dollars together without using the company's funds, all of which were deposited into the account of HSBC Holdings, expressing their support and trust in HSBC Holdings.

At the press conference, deposit receipts were also displayed, and the Governor of the Bank of England testified on the spot that the Bright Fund had indeed deposited 10 billion US dollars into the bank account of HSBC Holdings.

It is precisely because George Berkeley proposed this practical plan when he found Margaret Thatcher that it won the full support of the British government.

After the press conference was held, the whole of the UK was shocked by the generous funds of the Bright Fund, and then the crisis of HSBC Holdings was directly suppressed to a minimum.

Then the influence quickly spread to the whole world, and the name of the Bright Fund was completely resounded all over the world.

In fact, these 10 billion US dollars of funds were temporarily secretly lent to the Bright Fund by the Royal Bank of Scotland, Standard Chartered Bank, Jiuding Bank, Chiba Bank of the Island Country, Wells Fargo Bank and other banks. Come forward and deposit with HSBC Holdings.

The reason why these banks are not allowed to support HSBC Holdings is that they do not want to reveal their strength. Second, the identity of the banks is too sensitive. It involves HSBC Holdings, which is in a quagmire. If the public opinion is not well controlled, it is easy to drag these banks into the water. .

Therefore, Xia Yu chose to put the Bright Fund at the top, and at the same time used this opportunity to let the Bright Fund advertise once in the world.

The tens of billions of dollars in advertising proved to be extremely effective.

At least one point, Margaret Thatcher has a deeper understanding of Xia Yu's strength. After all, there are very few people who can mobilize ten billion US dollars of liquidity in a short period of time.

Bright Fund acquired HSBC Holdings, and naturally owned 54.7 percent of its subsidiary, Hong Kong HSBC.

In addition, Jiuding Securities now holds a 39.7 percent stake in HSBC Hong Kong.

Xia Yu has already controlled 94.4% of HSBC in Hong Kong, and the remaining small part is scattered in the Hong Kong stock market.

When Xiang, political and business leaders were still lamenting the power of HSBC Holdings and the Bright Fund, they did not know that Xia Yu had firmly established himself as the hegemon of the Hong Kong banking industry.

The largest Jiuding Bank in Heungkong, the second largest Heungkong HSBC and the third largest Standard Chartered Bank, all belong to Xia Yu!

PS: It's the beginning of the month, please ask for a recommended monthly ticket, I wish everyone a happy Mid-Autumn Festival! Happy reunion! I also wish the motherland prosperous and prosperous, the country is peaceful and the people are safe!

https://

Genius for a second to remember the address of this site: . Zero-point reading mobile version reading website: