The Best Cyprus Community

Skip to content


ADMIN: Request IP check on member cp279

Do you have any suggestions on how we can improve our forums?

Moderator: Admin

Re: ADMIN: Request IP check on member cp279

Postby Paphitis » Sat Jan 07, 2017 12:55 am

DT. wrote:
Paphitis wrote:Because let's face it. Australia is also a big investor in Cyprus. One Australian Investment is worth millions all on its own.

Cobalt Aviation - is an Australian Owned business. Cobalt employ 250 people and rising with continuous expansion of their fleet up to A330 and long haul direct flights to China and plans for long haul direct flights to USA from Cyprus.

Oh and btw, Kerry Packer's son owns Crown Casinos and has some of the biggest Casinos in the world and is a bidder for the Cyprus Casino Licence.


Sorry Paphitis but I know first hand that cobalt is purely Hong Kong funded. They had an Australian CEO who was fired.


Yeh Australian Pilots from Cathay Pacific DT. Half of Cathay is Australian. Direct investment is purely Australian Capital. Just because some of these guys worked for Cathay does not make it from Hong Kong.

BTW, Andrew Pyne still owns the business and wasn't sacked. Chief Pilot is Andrew Schroeder, a former Qantas Guy. Andrew Madar also from QF. Andrew Payne also a former QF and Cathay guy.

You got Cathay and Qantas all over that business.

Andrew Payne also opened an Airline in Russia which went bust and now plans to open an airline in China and have Cobalt feed into it.

These are smart business people trying to establish themselves into China.
User avatar
Paphitis
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 20971
Joined: Sun May 21, 2006 2:06 pm

Re: ADMIN: Request IP check on member cp279

Postby Get Real! » Sat Jan 07, 2017 2:22 am

Paphitis wrote:Because let's face it. Australia is also a big investor in Cyprus.

:lol:

WARNING: This is a thread you must IMMEDIATELY back-out from Paphitis.

ADVICE: Go back to the granny thread and wait for a couple of months.
User avatar
Get Real!
Forum Addict
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 40427
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:25 am
Location: Nicosia

Re: ADMIN: Request IP check on member cp279

Postby DT. » Sat Jan 07, 2017 8:39 am

Paphitis wrote:
DT. wrote:
Paphitis wrote:Because let's face it. Australia is also a big investor in Cyprus. One Australian Investment is worth millions all on its own.

Cobalt Aviation - is an Australian Owned business. Cobalt employ 250 people and rising with continuous expansion of their fleet up to A330 and long haul direct flights to China and plans for long haul direct flights to USA from Cyprus.

Oh and btw, Kerry Packer's son owns Crown Casinos and has some of the biggest Casinos in the world and is a bidder for the Cyprus Casino Licence.


Sorry Paphitis but I know first hand that cobalt is purely Hong Kong funded. They had an Australian CEO who was fired.


Yeh Australian Pilots from Cathay Pacific DT. Half of Cathay is Australian. Direct investment is purely Australian Capital. Just because some of these guys worked for Cathay does not make it from Hong Kong.

BTW, Andrew Pyne still owns the business and wasn't sacked. Chief Pilot is Andrew Schroeder, a former Qantas Guy. Andrew Madar also from QF. Andrew Payne also a former QF and Cathay guy.

You got Cathay and Qantas all over that business.

Andrew Payne also opened an Airline in Russia which went bust and now plans to open an airline in China and have Cobalt feed into it.

These are smart business people trying to establish themselves into China.


You're gonna lose on this one Paphiti. We spent a lot of time with this company and its management. Andrew Pyne owns no equity and the Hong Kong investor is a wealthy Chinese group. Australia has nothing to do with cobalt.

http://www.avic.com/en/aboutus/Leadership/index.shtml That's the owner, a very old Chinese company.
User avatar
DT.
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12200
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:34 pm
Location: Lefkosia

Re: ADMIN: Request IP check on member cp279

Postby Robin Hood » Sat Jan 07, 2017 9:10 am

As the OP seems to have hit the skids and the thread has become a discussion on Paphitis’ peculiar concept of ‘investments’ ......... :roll:

DT:
This is fresh cash injected directly into the economy via the bank which is probably one of the most direct ways of impacting an economy.


I would question that statement and many economists would disagree with that perception. I think it demonstrates where banking and economics diverge. In reality QE issued to banks has very little impact on the REAL economy all it contributes to is primarily the inflation of assets. It comes down to a question of following the money!

As I understand the process, the Central bank recapitalises the banks by increasing their reserves using QE. This allows them to increase lending. They lend by buying bonds from pension funds, hedge funds and other financial institutions. These institutions in turn buy shares from the stock markets as investments.

We have agreed that IF they use the loan to buy the first issue of a share release, then they give that amount to the company that issues the shares. The investors then rely on dividends and the anticipation of an increase in the value put on the shares by market traders, to make the money to repay the bond debt/interest and make their profits.

The company that sold the initial issue of shares to these financial institutions benefits, as does the economy as the money is a ‘gift’ not a loan. However, most of the shares they buy are existing shares, or even overseas investments and thus it has no benefit for the real economy. Likewise, the banks also finance through loans/mortgages, property purchases and, just like shares, only when it is the first purchase of a new property is it of any benefit to the real economy. Subsequent sales only increase asset values ........... i.e. the financial economy.

A recent £70bn QE programme by the BoE went exclusively to the banks, and had very little if any impact on the real economy. All it did was boost share and property values. It didn’t create jobs and it did not increase wealth ........ it only increased asset values.

If, as suggested at the time by many economists, the QE was instead spent directly into the economy it would have had an enormously positive effect by stimulating the real economy. It would have created jobs , thus more people with money to spend, which in turn stimulates more investment in new businesses, creates wealth .......... thus more jobs and more money spent and creates more wealth ..... and so on. All QE did was to increase asset values which takes money OUT of the economy as they are static investments that are not wealth creating.

The only ones that benefit from routing QE through the banks ..... are the banks. :roll:

So, by-pass the banks and invest directly in infrastructure and industrial expansion and QE would have a terrific effect economically. The current system merely increases private debt and the gap between the very rich, the middle and working classes and, of course, the poor.
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: ADMIN: Request IP check on member cp279

Postby DT. » Sat Jan 07, 2017 9:38 am

Robin Hood wrote:As the OP seems to have hit the skids and the thread has become a discussion on Paphitis’ peculiar concept of ‘investments’ ......... :roll:

DT:
This is fresh cash injected directly into the economy via the bank which is probably one of the most direct ways of impacting an economy.


I would question that statement and many economists would disagree with that perception. I think it demonstrates where banking and economics diverge. In reality QE issued to banks has very little impact on the REAL economy all it contributes to is primarily the inflation of assets. It comes down to a question of following the money!

As I understand the process, the Central bank recapitalises the banks by increasing their reserves using QE. This allows them to increase lending. They lend by buying bonds from pension funds, hedge funds and other financial institutions. These institutions in turn buy shares from the stock markets as investments.

We have agreed that IF they use the loan to buy the first issue of a share release, then they give that amount to the company that issues the shares. The investors then rely on dividends and the anticipation of an increase in the value put on the shares by market traders, to make the money to repay the bond debt/interest and make their profits.

The company that sold the initial issue of shares to these financial institutions benefits, as does the economy as the money is a ‘gift’ not a loan. However, most of the shares they buy are existing shares, or even overseas investments and thus it has no benefit for the real economy. Likewise, the banks also finance through loans/mortgages, property purchases and, just like shares, only when it is the first purchase of a new property is it of any benefit to the real economy. Subsequent sales only increase asset values ........... i.e. the financial economy.

A recent £70bn QE programme by the BoE went exclusively to the banks, and had very little if any impact on the real economy. All it did was boost share and property values. It didn’t create jobs and it did not increase wealth ........ it only increased asset values.

If, as suggested at the time by many economists, the QE was instead spent directly into the economy it would have had an enormously positive effect by stimulating the real economy. It would have created jobs , thus more people with money to spend, which in turn stimulates more investment in new businesses, creates wealth .......... thus more jobs and more money spent and creates more wealth ..... and so on. All QE did was to increase asset values which takes money OUT of the economy as they are static investments that are not wealth creating.

The only ones that benefit from routing QE through the banks ..... are the banks. :roll:

So, by-pass the banks and invest directly in infrastructure and industrial expansion and QE would have a terrific effect economically. The current system merely increases private debt and the gap between the very rich, the middle and working classes and, of course, the poor.


Thanks RH, but I think you've missed the point of QE. Primarily QE is used as an inflationary tool in order to boost asset prices and lower yields, thus cheapening lending. Cheaper yields lead to cheaper loans for businesses, leading to growth and spending. Higher asset prices lead o more equity for individuals again leading to growth and spending.
User avatar
DT.
Leading Contributor
Leading Contributor
 
Posts: 12200
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 8:34 pm
Location: Lefkosia

Re: ADMIN: Request IP check on member cp279

Postby Robin Hood » Sat Jan 07, 2017 10:22 am

DT

Thank you for the reply .... it is an interesting subject (at least to me it is :roll: :) )

Have you heard of an outfit called Positive Money? They have been pushing this for some years and have been acting as advisors to the UK Treasury with some success and trying to get a monetary review committee set up. Their site is worth a visit, although I don't agree with everything they say .... a lot of it makes sense.
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Re: ADMIN: Request IP check on member cp279

Postby GreekIslandGirl » Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:21 am

Robin Hood wrote:
The only ones that benefit from routing QE through the banks ..... are the banks. :roll:


Spot on!
User avatar
GreekIslandGirl
Main Contributor
Main Contributor
 
Posts: 8954
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2011 1:03 am

Re: ADMIN: Request IP check on member cp279

Postby Robin Hood » Sat Jan 07, 2017 7:38 pm

DT:
You are thinking ‘banking’ I am thinking ‘economics’ and that becomes obvious if you consider what I said:
So, by-pass the banks and invest directly in infrastructure and industrial expansion and QE would have a terrific effect economically. The current system merely increases private debt and the gap between the very rich, the middle and working classes and, of course, the poor
.
..... and your response:
Thanks RH, but I think you've missed the point of QE. Primarily QE is used as an inflationary tool in order to boost asset prices and lower yields, thus cheapening lending. Cheaper yields lead to cheaper loans for businesses, leading to growth and spending. Higher asset prices lead to more equity for individuals again leading to growth and spending.


I don’t think I have '.... missed the point ' at all ! :wink:

QE is new money created by the Central bank and the money created comes from the same source as that created by commercial banks but without the restraints of having an imposed limit. It is nothing more than a ledger entry. As the current system operates, it does not create inflation and the reason is because it is a loan to borrowers but to the bank it is simply an injection of capital, just as it if the CB was buying new shares in the banks. There is no debt on the banks as loans are considered assets. These private loans have to be repaid by the banks borrowers .... with interest. When the loan is repaid, just like now, the money it initially created is destroyed .... i.e. written off the books. So you have taken out of the economy more than the new money the QE allowed the commercial banks to create in the form of debt. So the current system is actually antithetical to the health of the economy as it reduces the amount of money in circulation.

The above assumes that the QE boost enters into the real economy but we know most of it goes just where you describe ......... into assets, and assets benefit individuals and institutions, NOT the real economy. Instead of the QE creating jobs and boosting industrial production it simply goes into buying receipts (mainly existing shares) from the markets, who just happen to also determine the value of those shares, or property.

If QE goes directly into the economy and by-passes the banking system, it is not a loan, therefore attracts no interest and does not have to be repaid. Effectively the State is buying a new share issue in the economy rather than effectively buying new shares from the banks and allowing the banks to use that free money to make a profit. If there is no loan there is no debt to repay and no interest. Just as QE giving the banks a boost, this gives industry a boost as this QE is spent into the real economy.You still have growth but the economy grows without the burden of increasing private debt.

Equity inflation does not increase growth or spending ........ unless you convert the equity into money ..... you can’t spend shares or houses otherwise. Outside of this the investment banks can carry on as they do now but their funding would no longer be from commercial banks, they would need to rely on private/institutional investors, thus the link between commercial banks and investment banks needs to be severed. (as per Glass Steagall)

https://berniesanders.com/yes-glass-steagall-matters-here-are-5-reasons-why/

The more you look at it the less beneficial the current markets system becomes .... but that is a separate argument.


I say again that what I see is thinking aligned with banking conflicting with thinking aligned with economics. The banking alignment profits the financial institutions to the detriment of the real economy ....... the economic alignment benefits the real economy to the detriment of the financial institutions! Changes in share prices effect the financial economy but have no real impact of the real economy, although when you watch the BBC and their economics ‘experts’ like Aaron Hazlehurst you would be forgiven for believing that the real economy was absolutely dependent upon market performance, when it isn’t. :roll:
Robin Hood
Regular Contributor
Regular Contributor
 
Posts: 2534
Joined: Mon May 18, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Limassol

Previous

Return to Suggestions and Feedback

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests