What does Moody's downgrade of Co-op bank mean?

 
The Co-op bank

A couple of seemingly bad things have happened at the Co-operative bank in the past 12 hours.

Its credit rating has been downgraded by Moody's to "not prime" (a euphemism for junk) and it's losing its chief executive, Barry Tootell.

How serious are these events?

Well I am told that Mr Tootell had been planning to leave for some time - in part because the big part of his job, preparing for the massive expansion of the bank through the takeover of 631 branches from Lloyds, is no longer happening.

He has been replaced on an "acting" basis by Rod Bulmer, already in the bank and who is apparently a good thing.

In a way, what is most interesting is that, as I understand it, Mr Tootell's departure announcement was brought forward a bit, because the Co-op felt it needed to be doing something, in the wake of the rather dour assessment of its bank's prospects by Moody's.

So what is the significance of Moody's downgrade?

Well, to state the bleedin' obvious, in the aftermath of the ratings agencies' catastrophically poor performance in the run-up to the great crash of 2007-8, their pronouncements don't have the quite the authority they once did.

That said, the downgrade is likely to make it a bit more expensive for the Co-op Bank to borrow, which doesn't help when its profitability is so squeezed (as it is).

But it makes four big points that the Co-op can't simply bat away:

  1. The bank needs hundreds of millions of pounds of additional capital, to absorb potential future losses.
  2. Regulators may force the bank to raise more than the £600m to £800m of capital it is set to obtain from its parent, the wider Co-op group, through the disposal of life insurance and general insurance operations.
  3. The bank faces substantial further losses on poor quality loans it has made, especially property loans made by the Britannia Building Society, with which it merged in 2009.
  4. In a low interest rate environment, prospects for substantial profits growth at Co-op bank are limited.

Now one of the most striking things about Co-op Bank's customers is they seem to love their bank rather more than would be true of customers of the bigger banking groups. That is certainly the evidence of letters and emails I was sent by many of them after the takeover was abandoned of all those branches and assets from Lloyds.

So should those customers be anxious about Moody's downgrade?

Start Quote

Is the Co-operative group the best owner of a bank, at a time when profit margins in banking are so low, and may remain so?”

End Quote

Well there is no reason to believe that their savings are seriously at risk of incurring losses. As Co-op says today, it has plenty of cash or liquidity to hand - I understand it has a cash liquidity buffer of £3bn.

Also, the parent group is huge, with assets of £82bn and cash not far off £7bn. If the worse came to the worst, there is plenty of other stuff that could be sold, to provide additional capital to the bank.

What I think the downgrade highlights is a point I made after the collapse of the Lloyds deal - which is whether the Co-operative group, with its leading position in supermarkets and funeral homes (for example), is the best owner of a bank, at a time when profit margins in banking are so low, and may remain so.

How would those who work in all those other Co-op businesses feel about any profits they generate being poured into the bank, thus limiting the ability of their operations to expand?

Moody's downgrade will further sharpen a debate within the Co-op, under its new chief executive Euan Sutherland, about whether it should get out of banking.

UPDATE 13:22

There is a bit of nonsense in my blog, for which I apologise.

When I was away from my computer screen, I asked the Co-op to email me a number for the value of group assets, so that I could give you some sense of what it could flog - in a worst case - if it needed cash in a hurry.

What it sent me was the assets including banking and insurance assets - i.e. including the loans and investments it has made. For some reason, it didn't occur to me that the £82bn included all those tens of billions of pounds of financial assets (my pathetic excuse is I have a cold).

Anyway, that enormous number is only semi relevant.

More relevant for assessing the ability of the non-financial part of the group to support the bank is the Co-op's gross assets in non-financial operations of £6.3bn and the larger Co-op's net equity of £4.5bn.

So there is value in the rest of the Co-op, but it is not unlimited.

Which rather reinforces the notion that the long-term health of the broader Co-op may require it to find a buyer for the bank.

 
Robert Peston, economics editor Article written by Robert Peston Robert Peston Economics editor

Has government hurt education exports?

Higher education is a big British export success, but are government policies stunting its growth?

Read full article

More on This Story

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 341.

    Once again, Peston's partisan tendencies have muddied both his reporting and his reputation; it is no good blaming the Agencies for the naive incompetence of an irrelivant also ran, popular with those similarly blinded by the headlights of socialist illusions.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 340.

    The real problem, which has been suspected for sometime, is that the CoOp Bank is somewhat amateurish. The bid for the Lloyd's branches has exposed this, and it has been left 'showing is slip' as they say.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 339.

    If the Co-op are in such a perilous state why did Lloyds spend so much time and money on Verde. Was due diligence not carried out?
    oh wait a moment - we've been here before with the HBOS take over -"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it"

  • rate this
    -1

    Comment number 338.

    Does anybody really care what Moody's says? Why hasn't Moody's been given a substantial downgrade?

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 337.

    Andrew@336
    "NOT equal partners
    NOT partners at all"
    But, they COULD be

    IF all 'lenders' are businesses, & all 'borrowers' businesses, & if all individuals are equal shareholders in all businesses by virtue of agreed equality of share in national income (other arrangements, secondary, falling to be revised), THEN all transactions become professional, regulated in conscience & audit, for the best

 

Comments 5 of 341

 

Features

  • Two women in  JohanesburgYour pictures

    Readers' photos on the theme of South Africa


  • Worcestershire flagFlying the flag

    Preserving the identities of England's counties


  • Female model's bottom in leopard skin trousers as she walks up the catwalkBum deal

    Why budget buttock ops can be bad for your health


  • The OfficeIn pictures

    Fifty landmark shows from 50 years of BBC Two


  • French luxury Tea House, Mariage Freres display of tea pots Tea for tu

    France falls back in love with tea - but don't expect a British cuppa


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.