Only the numbers criminals would be interested in buying these shares.

If, as looks likely, only NIB and the Public Treasury will prop up BOB via its next funding call, then in effect we the General Public are keeping this cesspool afloat. Our future pensions and other health benefits (including Christie's disastrous universal health scheme) will now be under severe pressure to deliver to present and future claimants, because I very much doubt that BOB will ever pay back its debts.

And for what? Just so that the same crooks, croneys and "friends of" can steal more money from BOB's bottomless cookie jar. I may not be a financial wizard, but this stinks to high heaven.

BoB needs to be liquidated immediately and a criminal investigation similtaneously commenced against the PM, Halkitis, The Central Bank (John Rolle and his predecessor Wendy Craigg), BISX (Keith Davies) and everyone else involved in keeping a defunct bankrupt banking enterprise afloat while wrongfully inducing the public to invest additional funds in BoB and continuing to allow BoB to solicit deposits, whether from the private or public sector. The Bahamas Government itself and the National Insurance Fund are for all intents and purposes now bankrupt too; there is no ability to increase taxes and NI contributions, respectively, without effectively shutting down the private sector economy. It is therefore tantamount to fraudulent conduct on the part of the individuals mentioned to suggest that BoB cannot fail because it has the full faith and backing of the Bahamian government behind it. That is simply an absurdly false and wrongful assumption, period! There is greater credibility in believing in the tooth fairy!! There's no regulation of BoB by the regulators as they are a big part of the problem and it's now all just a con game in an all out effort to try rob Peter in order to pay Paul.

**Just another shit show run by the Government of The Bahamas, who would expect anything more than what you have, a failure! Oh, so true to form. I wonder if even PLP's would be so brave as to invest in this bank/slush fund. **

BoB is essentially bankrupt. Laws are being broken to keep it open. In any other jurisdiction, it would have been wound up years ago. How can the Bahamas maintain any semblance of banking trust when political cronies have bled a bank dry, and the Central Bank looks the other way when it comes to legal capital requirements, and on top of that, BISX won't let the shareholders get out? This is not a level playing field. Of course Sarkis Izmirlian learned that.

People should be going to jail to preserve the integrity of the financial structure of the Bahamas. This is an outrage.

This situation shows the world that the regulators are crooked, and can be bought and that we truly are a banana republic.

They already paid the Paul who screwed up the Bank. For all of his indiscretions he was given a hefty severance package and and is now being given a consulting/senior managers post in tanother Government run scam agency. This 24 million is just the tip of the iceburg, because when the govt. sells off the 200 million in loans the the "Chinese" Bank, at what they say is 2% interest rate, there will be another big writeoff. The Chinese are not stupid and no properly run financial institution is going to buy 200 million in delinquent and non-performing loans at par.
They will be lucky to get 25 cents on the dollar and will be looking at another 150 million in write offs. But don't worry the auditors of Winder et al will find a way to make the financials look great, just as they have done for the past 20 years. McQueeny is enjoying life and laughing his ass off.

Central Bank needs to determine if BoB is actually already insolvent and if so, petition for its liquidation in an effort to protect what limited assets remain and recommend a formal Commission of Enquiry be conducted.

It's time to man the lifeboats - the S.S. Bahamas is going down. Don't expect the PM and his crew to go down with the ship though.

Where's the securities commission in all of this? How long will they allow a failed company leeway to ask investors for funds?

What is unbelievable is that BoB continue to suffer these huge losses when banks like Fidelity and Commonwealth continue to record record profits. But RBC and Scotia continue their downsizing and reorganizing strategies. Tabac hasn't paid a dividend in two years. So was the $24 million loss as shocking as the headline is screaming? BoB did say it will be at least mid 2017 before it returns to profitability and since their losses are declining, this may still be possible. So of course risk takers will take advantage of the rights offering and it just may pay off.

*RBC hasn't paid a dividend in two years

Three dividends so far for 2016

Dividend History For Common Shares

Record Dates Payment Dates C$ Amount

>2016

July 26, 2016 August 24, 2016 0.81

April 25, 2016 May 24, 2016 0.81

January 26, 2016 February 24, 2016 0.79

>2015

October 26, 2015 November 24, 2015 0.79

July 27, 2015 August 24, 2015 0.77

April 23, 2015 May 22, 2015 0.77

January 26, 2015 February 24 2015 0.75

>2014

October 27, 2014 November 24, 2014 0.75

July 24, 2014 August 22, 2014 0.71

April 24, 2014 May 23, 2014 0.71

January 27, 2014 February 24, 2014 0.67

It appears John was referring to Finco, which is majority owned by RBC and which has suspended dividends for about 2 years.

RBC technically doesn't own RBC Finco. They incorporated a holding company called RBC Holdings (Bahamas) Ltd in ironically, Barbados. And they sold all of their shares in RBC Finco to this holding company in 2011. In addition, RBC-Finco shares are traded on BISX, where RBC shares are traded on the major exchanges.

RBC-Finco operates as an independent entity from RBC and still has a non-performing mortgage loan portfolio in the neighbourhood of $100 million dollars, which is why dividends were suspended two years ago. It's core business is still profitable (until they take the write-down for their non-performing loans). They will still be in fairly good shape with a billion in assets (again with the non-performing loans still on the books).

If RBC owns this holding company, which I fully expect, then they own the interest in Finco. As a matter of fact they own 75% of the shares in Finco.

As for operating as a separate entity that is not true. Finco has closed several branches and merged some into the same premises as RBC branches. Also much of the technical IT and back office work is being done by RBC staff, finco pays an annual fee to RBC for these services.

Also Finco has borrowed tens of millions of dollars from RBC at very favorable rates. Certainly they are a wholly separate entity in name only, they do not operate as a separate entity in reality.

It is so they can have plausible deniability in case something untoward happens, like finding Al Tawqa bank accounts in RBC-Finco. The shiite would hit the fan and they would suffer censure. Hence, an arm-length independence for the optics.

RBC-Finco has paid no dividends since 2014. The local subsidiary of RBC Canada has paid no dividends in two years. Not denying that BoB was revised and raped but have y'all forgotten that Predident Barsk Obama had to bail out some of the biggest banks in the USA? And have y'all forgotten that the bank problems was also because of irregular banking practices, similar to BoB where the banks were giving improperly secured loans to unqualified lenders. What made things worse was they then sold these loan portfolios to unsuspecting international banks, which help to lead to one of the greatest financial crisis and economic depressions in the history of mankind. So BoB is no exception. Remember also critics were saying Obama was trying to nationalize the banks and the automobile industry, whom he also bailed out. Fortunately all the companies were able to recover and repay their loans from the US government with hefty interest. Because of the stellar performance of BoB before it got financially ravished and rape it deserves a bail out. So be fair in your comments. The government has probably spent more money trying to rescue and revive Bah Mar than it spent bailing out BoB. Bah Mar has yet to generate revenue or prove it is a viable, sustainable or profitable entity.

See my note above. RBC-Finco is not a subsidiary of RBC Canada. It is owned by a Bajan holding company that is owned by RBC Canada, and operates as an independent entity with its shares trading locally on BISX while RBC Canada shares trade on the major markets. As such, RBC Finco has about 4,000 shareholders, which for a bank with close to a billion in assets on the books, isn't very much. But my note above outlines their delinquent loan portfolio.

Are you saying that by merely structuring a blocker Co. wholly owned by them between themselves and RBC-Finco changes the Parent/subsidiary relationship?

It's a very interesting situation, from a Canadian taxation point of view. It is not a direct subsidiary of RBC -- the holding company is. Two reasons -- there is the insulation from untoward results of tax haven money (which you call a blocker company). The second reason is that it behooves RBC (Bahamas) to act as a separate company. However it is a foreign company, so if it is wholly owned by a subsidiary, there is a tax deal with Barbados such that if they pay 4% tax on profits to the Bajan government, they can be repatriated back to Canada tax free. And they can play footsie with the amount of "profits" for Bajan taxation purposes. If the profits came from a wholly owned foreign corporation, there would be a significant tax hit. RBC (Bahamas) cannot be a subsidiary because of the various risks of running afoul of the OECD, the US etc. Notice this vehicle came into effect in 2011.

And if there is major trouble with money-laundering, breaking international law with some dubious accounts, there is double insulation. The first is the holding company and the second is that the Bahamian entity is not wholly owned by the holding company. It would be easy to do a snip, and still retain a vehicle for almost tax free profits from other operating entities.

It is really a nice piece of work in an obscene sort of way.

Not quite following your rationale or explanation. DonAnthony and John above are both correct. The primary purpose of the holding Co. is to take advantage of the double taxation treaty between Canada and Barbados which is a very basic component of the corporate structuring of the Canadian banks and other Canadian companies with foreign operations. This does not impact the Parent/subsidiary relationship.

You are trying to be technical and that way mislead. We (at least me) are talking about RBC as it relates to its operations in the Bahamas and, subsequently, its profitability in The Bahamas and the payment of dividends likewise. None has been paid by RBC, in those parameters, in two years, yes or no?

Sorry, didn't mean to be misleading -- just exact. RBC does in fact pay dividends, but the Bahamian operation which has Bahamian shareholders does not pay dividends and has not for 2 years. They still have about $100 million of non-performing loans on their books. However as one pundit pointed out, they have barrels of retained earnings, and they have assets of close to a billion dollars, so they are not in a precarious situation like BoB.

To be perfectly exact, yes, RBC(Bahamas) has not paid dividends in 2 years. RBC has.

FINCO no dividends but a HUGE stockpile of RETAINED EARNINGS. BOB needs to have yet another investigation as the previous investigation results have not been revealed. DOING the same things and getting losses calls for the Board to resign. Commonwealth Bank another local bank released results and 6 monthe profits have increased almost 3 million. Govt with its large stake should be calling for resignations and firings because seeking more funds of a 40 million magnitude after 100 million is a huge mistake and no investigations. Just like starting Road Improvments of 119 million and going over budget by almost 100 million and no one fired even though in both cases the govt is sitting on all the information to investigate. The Bahamas financial systen is open to questions for such a financial disaster especially as the govt appoints the DIRECTORS of the Central Bank and The Bank of the Bahamas and no questions by the opposition. Where is the INQUIRY by the opposition shows they too are incapable of getting to the bottom of this matter and instead only querying share price.

John, you can invest your money in BOB. Me, I'll take my chances with Commonwealth, Scotia ,RBC/Finco, FCB. These banks all operated in the same economic recession as BOB, and yes, experienced problems with their mortgage portfolios, due to that problem. However, none of them is saddled with hundreds of millions of politically based loans, that are for the most part under/non secured, with no real source of income to satisfy them. Most of these are B/S loans regardless of recessive or boom economic climates. Only BOB is effectively insolvent and their pipe dreams of returning to profitability, while under direction of the same Board that put them where they are, are just that, pipe dreams. If all of the local banks were in the same position, your points would be more credible, as you would be comparing apples to apples.
Sure, government can make all sorts of paper transactions like Resolve, or this new concocted deal with the Chinese Bank who are supposed to take over 200 million of BOB's loan portfolio, to make things look good until election time, but the underlying fact is this bank is bankrupt, and should be closed.

The problem with BoB is that the Government is involved and thus the bank is full of PLP cronies. BoB will NEVER be a good investment. Period! End of Story!

They are trying to put measures in place to prevent similar situations from happening in the future. They are trying to appoint members to the board who are minority shareholders to prevent the bank from making political loans and loans to unqualified persons and there is a good chance that the bank can return to profitability by third or fourth quarter 2017. If the bank was to shut its doors the minority shareholders would lose everything and whilst persons have expressed interest in purchasing the bank it may need to do more housecleaning before is can fetch a fair price. Banks are paying $43.92 interest on a $100,000.00 fixed deposit for one year. So investing in BoB considering its potential may not be as risky as you think.

The numbers aren't there to warrant its rescue. The figure for net equity is about $63.5 million. If you subtract the paper bond for the Resolve bailout, the bank's real net equity is -$36.5 million. It needs $40 million to bring it to zero, and then they will use the Resolve bond of $100 million to maintain adequate capitalisation.

But here is the rub. First, Resolve has indicated that without some sort of taxpayer relief, they are going to default on the bond. James Smith has publicly stated that they have picked all of the low-hanging fruit (in the case of the PLP -- fruits) and with their burn rate of available funds, they will run out of money in a few months time. So in effect the $100 million bond from Resolve is not worth the paper that it is printed on. (Still don't understand why Wendy Craigg, John Rolle and Paul McWeeney are not in jail for white collar crimes).

The second fly in the ointment (or pepper in the vaseline) is BISX and the actual valuation of their shares. It seems like the BISX shareholders of the bank are totally screwed. The exchange is quoting one price, while the offering is hugely discounted, and the exchange is so moribund, that existing shareholders cannot dump their worthless shares. So how much should the price of the shares be. In a free, unfettered market, you take the net equity and divide it by the outstanding shares, and when you get a base, you multiply that times a factor to get a suitable P/E ratio (Price to Earnings) for a fair market value of a share. Then you let the markets take it from there and determine the trading value. In this case, both the net equity, and Earnings are negative when you cut through the BS of the bailout. The assets of the bank are smoke and mirrors, and they still have a crapload of toxic loans that are still on the books as assets.

The bank is a total disaster, and a whole pile of people need to go to jail -- everyone from the bankers, to the regulators.

Agree. The govt itself needs to guarantee or absorbing unsold shares to protect investment however has not done so showing its own foresight. Plus indicating if it itself is not confident then why should shareholders be the one to prop up their shares not as large as the govt's. Sold bulk of my shares when price was above $8. years ago as the writing was on the wall that it does not only take maths to make profits but customer service, and willingness to investigate customers complaints and do the right thing where necessary. The Board needs to resign because after 4 years now, year after year, after year, after year and the Chairman is an Accountant and we are at this state. If only minority shareholders some 4,000 were like voters that at least in the 5th year we would have an option to vote. Fully agree with jail time to send message internationally and to Moodys, Standards and Poor, World Bank, IMF, IDB, OECD, EU, agencies for derisking, etc that we can correct economic shortcomings.

Another company went through a similar situation It was not a bank but its shares fell from $1.90 to 45 cents maybe even less. I took a risk and bought 60,000. The shares went up to $2.00 plus and I sold 40,000 of the shares. Now the price is back down to $1.50. But new government policy is expected to push the profitability and value of this company and persons are just gobbling up the shares.

Yes that is very possible, and good for you. However, you need to look at the balance sheet. The company probably had assets or a book value greater than what the share price reflected.

I myself have a foreign trading account, and I bought Sierra Wireless for $17 a share a few years ago. I sold at $44.00. It has since gone back to around $17.

This is what pisses me off. Bahamians should have the right to participate in the stock markets, and yet with the exchange controls, they are locked out and marginalised, unless they have access to foreign capital, which most don't.

Now, if we dollarised the economy, Bahamians could possibly day-trade to make money. I know that there are a few foreign shysters out there, inviting Bahamians to trade Forex, but they are all bucket shops. Your trades are not executed on any exchanges, but on a dark exchange run by them. If you take a large position, the bucket shop trades against you.

No shareholder in their right mind would exercise their rights under this offer. NIB will certainly be used to purchase a large chunk of the $40 million rights issue which will simply add to the already gigantic $1.6 billion pension black hole. Bahamian politicians have proven themselves to be unfit to govern their own country and the people are paying a huge price for independence. What could have been!

Looking at the issue and pricing what seems to be the path will be shareholders placing shares for sale with hope that someone will buy triggering a series of outcomes not anticipated.

they should have given more time. there are persons interested in the rights offer and they should have allowed time for persons to sell their rights

Re-post: For quite sometime now, BoB has been wrongly and criminally allowed to continue illegally operating as an insolvent banking enterprise. Thanks to Perry Christie and the others named above by Reality_Check, the government, or more accurately put, we, the Bahamian people are left holding the proverbial bag of mega-millions of unrecorded losses that will undoubtedly have to be realized/recognized from the collapse of this corruptly run bank. It is patently wrong, in fact fraudulent, for BoB to remain open for business so that the corrupt Christie-led government can continue to feed it with public funds (in the form of government deposits and government backed bonds, e.g. Bahamas Resolve), as well as National Insurance funds held under trust for NI contributors, for the purpose of bailing out (by payments of dividends or otherwise) the preferred shareholders and holders of debt instruments issued by BoB who have political connections. The shares held by the unsecured equity shareholders are worthless paper and will remain as such. Only a fool would invest more money in BoB so that it may be used by the bank to bail out Christie's most favoured cronies! The BoB and Baha Mar debacles warrant the formation of an independent Commission of Inquiry to investigate the apparent criminal conduct of those involved in fleecing the Bahamian people.

And Perry wants Bahamians to bank with that bank????????????.............. BOL