 You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
that dodges the following question/mitigates any offense caused to a bank by answering.
"The banks have been given a lot of bad press in the media lately, in regards to the banking crisis. Do you think we hold any responsibility for the crisis?"
Any one got any ideas?
who is 'we'? The banks or some other entity?
who is 'we'? The banks or some other entity?
Edited, yesh a bank.
Everyone holds some responsibility for the crisis and the banks have been one of the first to have to address their systemic issues. In that regard, they are leading the pack where the general public will inevitably have to follow.*
*may or may not be all damn lies.
What is the context?
"We're all in it together" why reinvent the wheel?
Interview for a position with UBS. 😈
Politician's answer? Say something completely unrelated to the question.
Seriously? If so, you need to really consider the Swiss reaction especially re regulation (capital) and the different answers given by UBS and CS to the future of IB (among other things)
Although the banks can be identified as a cause of the current economic crisis a wider view must be taken. Banks provide a service to their customers, and at least some,of the blame,should lie with them. It is also essential to view the bigger picture when considering the issue. It is easy to paint the banks as evil faceless corporations gambling with public funds, but no one questioned it when they were winning, was there business practice any more moral then? Also, it is worth noting that Cameron is a smuggy smuggy smug smug who probably smells.
Answer it honestly. Yes, indeed the Bank have a responsibility for the Banking Crises (the clue is in the name of the Crises). However, you also acknowledge that the Banks are indeed putting their house in order, and that there is still a lot of work to be done in correcting what went wrong, and that you are thrilled to have the opportunity to play your small part in taking the whole industry forward, and back to a place that it is again a well trusted and respected part of society.
In order for banks to be guilty of lending too much, people had to want borrow too much. The banks were responding to demand by lending more than people could afford to borrow. The public, and of course government, who borrowed far too much to have things which they could really not afford are much more to blame. The banks must however take some responsibilty for making their credit-checking procedures too lax, but ultimately they cannot make people borrow money.
It is odd how, having got into a mess by borrowing too much, the governemnt is attempting to encourage more borrowing again. The banks are now being critised for not lending enough, when it was lending too much which got us into this mess. They can't win.
Seriously? If so, you need to really consider the Swiss reaction especially re regulation (capital) and the different answers given by UBS and CS to the future of IB (among other things)
I have a Biomedical undergrad background and I'm studying stats postgrad.
I filled out an application for a laugh not knowing a thing about the banking industry and got a reply giving me 7 days to do a crash course in the banking industry for an interview in London.
Edited: Brilliant, thanks guys.
You can't blame the banks without also taking into account the wider picture. The banks were investing the money we invested and asked them to maximise the return on, and the banking sector relies on all of us for their custom, at the same time the regulation of the sector was laid down by the politicians we elected to represent us - so the entire system is interconnected, and as such we all have to share some of the blame.
It wasn't just as simple as lending too much that caused the crises, it was how the Banks then dealt with that debt - packaging up the Sub Prime mortgages and selling them on around the world, through multiple investment vehicles. Once these started turning bad, it had a very large domino effect, property prices crashed and these investments turned toxic as virtually all Banks were exposed. To add to the problem, many Banks not just lent, but also bought into the equity of the companies they were lending to, most prominantly property investment companies, so when they started sliding, not only was the lending going bad, but the Banks investment in said companies became worthless.
A lack of regulation is also an issue. If someone announced that shoplifting was no longer illegal, I suspect a few of us may call into Leisure Lakes on the way home and our bikes would soon be sporting new shiny bits
Successive governments gave the banks the keys to the sweet shop and asked them nicely not to eat ALL the midget gems, with no threat of censure if they did. The FSA nor the Bank of England seemed to have not the slightest comprehension of what was actually going on within the financial institutions they were supposedly regulating
No, staff who applied' for a laugh' is the cause of the crises 😉
More seriously Robert pestons and the stephanomics blogs on bbc may give you enough clever answers to get you through the interview
The deregulation of financial derivatives is largely to blame.
This lead to some really shoddy practices by lenders. They no longer cared if the loan was ever going to be repaid as in many cases they made just as much money if the debtors defaulted.
Breaking this link between the lender and the debtor is the real reason behind the banking crash
Bwaarp - from our debates on here, I would never have guessed this!! Anyway good luck. Here are a few suggestions
For a wider read on the crisis (esp the global linkages)
plus a link to various BoE docs
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/Pages/Search.aspx?k=banking%20crisis
A quick comment on what went wrong
http://www.efinancialnews.com/story/2008-04-21/in-their-own-words-what-went-wrong-at-ubs
A more detailed academic analysis from Univ of Zurich
And finally check out their investor relations website
http://www.ubs.com/global/en/about_ubs/investor_relations/presentations/2012.html
Read Ermotti's brief strategy presentation from Nov 2012 (esp page 3)
Enjoy!!
It wasn't just as simple as lending too much that caused the crises, it was how the Banks then dealt with that debt - packaging up the Sub Prime mortgages and selling them on
By sub-prime, we mean 'lending to people who can't afford to pay it back.' Huge untapped market there!
"well Fred didn't lose his job for nuffink"
I would agree with reading Peston (more Flanders) but dont quote him in a City interview. He goes down like a cup of cold sick IMO. I doubt that you would get asked this but try to differentiate between what happened to the global banking industry in general and to UBS specifically if you want mega brownie points. But be v careful, there are a lot of bruised egos, and angst round there. Just been through another big redundancy round. They wont appreciate smart arsed comments. Be ready to turn it around with an argument about why you would want to work for a bank right now!!
Awesome, there's a lot to digest here but it's proving to be a fun challenge.
Bwaarp - from our debates on here, I would never have guessed this!! Anyway good luck. Here are a few suggestions
Not many jobs these days, I decided to develop the statistics side of my education to widen my job field. Biomedical research positions are becoming increasingly hard to find and they tend to be very very specialized. You can end up being stupidly well qualified in some obscure genetic research etc and then find yourself out of a job and competing for fields you know far less about.
Stats is allowing me to cast me net out further to jobs such as banking, policy advice/research, public health and statistical consulting etc etc.
At the end of the day, I need a decent job. Making my educational background more general instead of pursuing something like neuroscience....is the best choice I've ever made.
Well good luck with it all!!
The banking sector provides excellent jobs IME. Good luck.
Thanks for the good luck chaps, this threads been very informative. There's a good community here.
General rule - always start off with something positive to say about the subject and then deal with the negative.
e.g. The banks have responded very well to the situation...