Citi give me a Mandy Rice-Davis moment on NS&I

Way back when, I think it might have been my Dad, may have been some other wise old geezer, giving a young ermine some advice.

Never ever miss the opportunity, in some situations, to keep schtum and STFU.

The advice sprang to mind as I read that Citigroup are dischuffed that savers have the temerity to get into NS&I savings rather than watch their money slowly die as the rapacious banks refuse to give them a decent return on savings. Apparently the certificates are a bad idea according to Citi-

“While the new national savings index-linked certificates appear highly popular with many investors, we believe they are a bad idea for the government: they are likely to prove a highly expensive form of funding and will hinder the important task of reducing the UK banking sector’s reliance on wholesale funding,”

Obviously they are speaking from the point of view of what is best for the country, then, rather than as a form of egregious special-interest group pleading?

Well, that’s all right then. It also brought to mind another classic quote from the past, the elegant accuracy of Mandy Rice-Davies during the trial of Stephen Ward in the Profumo scandal.

Well he would say that, wouldn’t he?

Exactly, Mr Citigroup. You would say that, wouldn’t you? It’s so much easier than going back to your desk and working out how to offer a decent rate of  savings interest. Alternatively, just take my Dad’s advice and observe this is a situation to STFU.

After all, a fair amount of UK Government money has gone into bonuses for some of your buddies. It’s about time some of the lowly grunts that actually have to work for this money got a slice of the pie, don’tcha think? I haven’t loaded up my full 15k because I still have to earn the last couple of grand, probably not something that’s really an issue for Mr Citi, “Thought leader” extraordinaire.

No, I’m not taking the mickey. Seriously, “Thought Leadership” is one of citi’s Vikram Pandit’s core competencies, according to citi’s website. I think they’ve overstretched the mark here 😉