Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Goldman Sachs CEO hints at moving offices from London to Frankfurt Watch

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Because it is no longer in their financial interests to keep jobs in Britain. And yes - it is posturing in the hope that some sort of deal can be done to overt the catastrophe that would be a hard Brexit.

    I take it you don't remember the time when low value manufacturing jobs moved from the UK to far off lands, or the time when call centres moved from Britain to India - and then ironically back again? Even that British of all British inventors, James Dyson moved his manufacturing base to Eastern Europe to save costs and as I type the Vauxhall plant at Ellesmere Port is once again under threat with Brexit looming.

    A business like Goldman Sachs would have no issues taking the decision to move shop if it was in their interests to do so. Financial businesses are currently located in London because that is the place to be. That doesn't mean it will always be the place to be.
    Just FYI dyson only moved as he repeatedly couldn’t get permission to build the appropriate premises (apparently)
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wired_1800)
    That is because we are still tied to the EU. If the UK was allowed to trade with China, India, Russia, Nigeria, US, South Africa, Australia, i strongly doubt that the EU will still account for 45% of UK businesses.
    Hello???? Anyone there? Where does your iPhone come from? And before you answer, it isn't the US.

    We already trade with China, Russia, Nigeria etc etc. But the reason most businesses choose not to trade with these countries is because it is really difficult. If you want to trade with China you are firstly looking at a series of long and expensive flights. You then need to hire a fixer and translator when you get there to help orchestrate your deal. And that is assuming you can find the sort of businesses you want to trade with in the first place. If you are going to Nigeria, you need a pocket full of cash to pay bribes and your own body guard to add to your costs.

    By contrast, you can fly to / from Europe in a day (I have done it myself plenty of times), do your deal with people who generally all speak the same language and have similar cultural courtesys and still be back home in time to put the kids to bed. And when you get home, you know that the legalities of your deal can be settled in the UK courts if something goes wrong. It is what you might call "low risk".

    Why is that such a bad thing? Why do Brexiters feel that that isn't worth keeping and that we should instead be looking to do deals with the harder-to-do-deals parts of the world?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    Just FYI dyson only moved as he repeatedly couldn’t get permission to build the appropriate premises (apparently)
    Hmmmm - because there are no sites whatsoever to build large manufacturing facilities in the UK? The fact that his costs more than halved by moving to Eastern Europe was just an unfortunate side effect right?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Hmmmm - because there are no sites whatsoever to build large manufacturing facilities in the UK? The fact that his costs more than halved by moving to Eastern Europe was just an unfortunate side effect right?
    Just going by what I saw him complaining about on tv before moving, hence the brackets
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Hello???? Anyone there? Where does your iPhone come from? And before you answer, it isn't the US.

    We already trade with China, Russia, Nigeria etc etc. But the reason most businesses choose not to trade with these countries is because it is really difficult. If you want to trade with China you are firstly looking at a series of long and expensive flights. You then need to hire a fixer and translator when you get there to help orchestrate your deal. And that is assuming you can find the sort of businesses you want to trade with in the first place. If you are going to Nigeria, you need a pocket full of cash to pay bribes and your own body guard to add to your costs.

    By contrast, you can fly to / from Europe in a day (I have done it myself plenty of times), do your deal with people who generally all speak the same language and have similar cultural courtesys and still be back home in time to put the kids to bed. And when you get home, you know that the legalities of your deal can be settled in the UK courts if something goes wrong. It is what you might call "low risk".

    Why is that such a bad thing? Why do Brexiters feel that that isn't worth keeping and that we should instead be looking to do deals with the harder-to-do-deals parts of the world?
    I’d question why you think our trade with the eu will change that much.... it’s already gone down 10% in a decade
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    I’d question why you think our trade with the eu will change that much.... it’s already gone down 10% in a decade
    Which suggests that trade elsewhere has gone up because on average, we aren't any poorer for that decline. So where as some are saying we should leave because the market is declining, surely staying in isn't a hindrance to doing trade outside the EU? Regardless, 10% or not, the EU still accounts for the biggest share of exports. The next (US) is only on 18% and I don't see them exactly welcoming our exports. Their idea of a free trade deal is to flood our market with cheap shoddy goods.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Hello???? Anyone there? Where does your iPhone come from? And before you answer, it isn't the US.

    We already trade with China, Russia, Nigeria etc etc. But the reason most businesses choose not to trade with these countries is because it is really difficult. If you want to trade with China you are firstly looking at a series of long and expensive flights. You then need to hire a fixer and translator when you get there to help orchestrate your deal. And that is assuming you can find the sort of businesses you want to trade with in the first place. If you are going to Nigeria, you need a pocket full of cash to pay bribes and your own body guard to add to your costs.

    By contrast, you can fly to / from Europe in a day (I have done it myself plenty of times), do your deal with people who generally all speak the same language and have similar cultural courtesys and still be back home in time to put the kids to bed. And when you get home, you know that the legalities of your deal can be settled in the UK courts if something goes wrong. It is what you might call "low risk".

    Why is that such a bad thing? Why do Brexiters feel that that isn't worth keeping and that we should instead be looking to do deals with the harder-to-do-deals parts of the world?
    Man, i don't know what to say anymore. I don't seem to be getting through to you.

    You seem to have been fed this absurd lie that only the EU knows how to do trade or have cultural courtesy. I gave you examples that we can trade with but you picked three of the countries to try and make the point look stupid.

    Not all countries are China, Russia or Nigeria, there are opportunities in the old Commonwealth, Canada, Australia etc, where cultural and language similarities are probably deeper than in certain european countries. You would not need a translator to deal with countries like the US, India and so on.

    It should not be strange to think that most of the countries outside the EU cannot speak English or understand the nuances of western businesss operations.

    Two, you seem to talk about Europe like all 27 countries are fantastic places to live and do business. Not only Nigeria will take bribes, East Europe is not really a great place to live. Romanians, Lithuanians, Polish, Spanish, Greeks, Italians and so on would not be running away from their nations, if it was absolutely excellent.

    As I have written in my responses to you, the withdrawal from the EU is to let go of the living within the limitations of the EU. It is crazy to think that we are still under the stronghold of a failing bloc.

    Not only Brits want to leave the EU, many other countries desparately want that, but their politicians will either not give them to choice to decide or make them vote again, if they choose what is different from the European Union's interests.

    I think at this point, we should agree to disagree because you probably seem to think that the EU is the best thing to happen to the UK.

    I guess that is why France and Germany want the UK to continue to pay into the EU budget for a long time after we have left. If the EU is awesome, we would have been kicked out and nobody would have cared.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Which suggests that trade elsewhere has gone up because on average, we aren't any poorer for that decline. So where as some are saying we should leave because the market is declining, surely staying in isn't a hindrance to doing trade outside the EU? Regardless, 10% or not, the EU still accounts for the biggest share of exports. The next (US) is only on 18% and I don't see them exactly welcoming our exports. Their idea of a free trade deal is to flood our market with cheap shoddy goods.
    It’s actually both, trade with the eu went down and trade outside went up, precisely because it isn’t growing.

    A lot of people think you and I are talking about 44% of GDP but we aren’t it’s exports of goods and services that number is derived from 240 billion out of a total of 550 billion of exports.

    That needed to be mentioned for the people who confuse that gdp/export figure.

    It’s also important on trade talking too, because if we are selling them 240 billion of stuff but we’re buying 300 billion of their stuff that extra 60 billion is 25% of the entirety of what we sell them, they really do have more to lose.

    People can mess around with figures of percentages of exports from the whole eu to the uk but the reality in cash is what I just said, and although at the moment one man is talking for 27 states it won’t stay that way throughout the talks, the more serious no deal becomes the more their voices will be heard.

    It may not even come to that anyway with some progress being made and we don’t have long to wait either isn’t it 5 or 6 weeks until the leaders meet up again?
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    It’s also important on trade talking too, because if we are selling them 240 billion of stuff but we’re buying 300 billion of their stuff that extra 60 billion is 25% of the entirety of what we sell them, they really do have more to lose.
    Agreed. But where as £300 billion of imports to us is a big deal to us, it only accounts for 16% of European exports. Surely we have more to lose that they?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Good for them, Frankfurt is a way nicer place to live than London
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ByEeek)
    Agreed. But where as £300 billion of imports to us is a big deal to us, it only accounts for 16% of European exports. Surely we have more to lose that they?
    That’s the misconception, you add all 27 together instead of what do we trade with Italy and visa versa etc because if we get to trade that is what comes out behind the scenes everyone fights for their own trade which is varied between different nations.
    Posted on the TSR App. Download from Apple or Google Play
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Economics Legend)
    You can almost smell the envy.

    You may not like bankers but they are talented hard working individuals that are vital to the tax revenues and prosperity of our nation. Many people eho ate going nowhete in life resent those that work in finance and ignore this fact.

    It is great that we are leaving the EU but let's not reduce the nation's most successful sector. Use Brexit to deregulate the economy and reduce the size of the state then Britain can prosper.
    In my experience most bankers are snobby know-it-alls, who think they've made it in life despite having less life experience than the average person. The banking system is designed to cause financial hardship for ordinary people by lending money they don't have and putting interest on it.

    Which means money from the real world will always be owed to the banks and while the bankers get rich personal debt builds up.

    As for Goldman Sachs, being the EUs biggest ally its unsurprising how they are posturing. But in the post-EU era London will still be a better option than Frankfurt or socialist Paris.

    Even if we were to lose 6000 jobs, in a workforce of 30 million it's a drop in the ocean.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    When it happens let us all know until then it’s just the usual positioning that people/particular business’ do.
    When was the last time, before Brexit, that he was considering that? Or anyone else.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wired_1800)
    The UK as a nation is in a strategic economic and geopolitical centre of international affairs that many companies will not leave it.
    Delusions of grandeur much?
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    Delusions of grandeur much?
    No. You should research about geopolitics and international trade. There is a reason why money flows freely through the UK over many European counterparts.

    Michael Bloomberg just completed a multi-billion pound financial centre in London. Do you think he would waste his money on a dud like people claim to think?
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Rakas21)
    Of the firms that have moved jobs from the city so far it appears that they are only moving about 20% of their workforce.

    The idea that banks have left en masse or are even planning to appears to be folly and without much evidence at this stage.

    The threat is if the EU take Euro clearing from London.
    My understanding is that there are no banks in Europe with anything approaching the size or capacity to take on the clearing functions UK banks provide. IIRC Deutsche is the biggest which pales in comparison to the likes of LCH. If they did force EU institutions to use EU-based clearing houses, they would face significantly higher costs and lower security. EU governments and businesses do not do their banking in London for no reason.

    The legal ability the EU even has to control clearing in Euros is dubious at best. They can demand EU institutions comply, but no one outside the EU needs the EU's permission to trade Euro-denominated instruments in the UK. A lot of Euro-clearing takes place in New York too, it's hard to imagine the market taking this lying down.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wired_1800)
    No. You should research about geopolitics and international trade. There is a reason why money flows freely through the UK over many European counterparts.

    Michael Bloomberg just completed a multi-billion pound financial centre in London. Do you think he would waste his money on a dud like people claim to think?
    You are talking about a single industry, and yet also talk about international trade as a whole. No one is denying that London has established itself as a financial powerhouse, and that isn't going to change. Yes, some jobs might be lost, but I also don't think entire operations will move, just those that need be within the EU. However, to conclude from this that UK is the centre of geopolitics and international trade is rather far fetched.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    You are talking about a single industry, and yet also talk about international trade as a whole. No one is denying that London has established itself as a financial powerhouse, and that isn't going to change. Yes, some jobs might be lost, but I also don't think entire operations will move, just those that need be within the EU. However, to conclude from this that UK is the centre of geopolitics and international trade is rather far fetched.
    Ok
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wired_1800)
    Ok
    lol
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by yudothis)
    lol


    :erm:
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What newspaper do you read/prefer?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.