We have some exciting news to share! The Motley Fool UK has now become The Twelfth Magpie -- an independent, UK-owned company, led by our long-serving UK management team — Mark Rogers, Chris Nials and Heather Adlington. In practical terms, it’s the same team you know, now fully focused on serving our UK readers and members.

Just as importantly, our approach remains unchanged: long-term, jargon-free, and on your side. This site is our new home, and there will be extra tweaks made across the coming few days as we settle in. So if anything looks a little off, please bear with us!

The content of this article was relevant at the time of publishing. Circumstances change continuously and caution should therefore be exercised when relying upon any content contained within this article.

Why Ed Balls Is Wrong About Royal Bank Of Scotland Group plc

There’s a fatal flaw in Ed Balls’ reasoning about the government’s ‘investment’ in Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc (LON: RBS).

| More on:

You’re reading a free article with opinions that may differ from The Motley Fool’s Premium Investing Services. Become a Motley Fool member today to get instant access to our top analyst recommendations, in-depth research, investing resources, and more. Learn More.

If he gets the chance, Ed Balls should sell Royal Bank of Scotland (LSE: RBS) (NYSE: RBS.US) shares fast, rather than hold on to them.

A laudable goal

In recent news, Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer Ed Balls reckons a British government run by the Labour Party would hold off selling its majority ownership in Royal Bank of Scotland so that taxpayers get their money back.

XXX

I can’t argue with the warm sentiment behind such a declaration. After all, every investor wants to get more back from an investment than he or she puts in. Even if an investment underperforms our expectations, we at least want to get our money back.

However, apparently missing from Mr Balls’s assessment is any calculation on the risk the government will be taking by holding the shares. The longer the hold, the more the odds of an unsuccessful outcome begin to stack up, in my view. “I’m not selling until they go back up,” is scant justification for a ‘hold’ in the cutthroat world of investing.

Working on the assumption that Royal Bank of Scotland shares will go up from here looks like something of a shaky proposition. They may, but there are also many reasons to suppose that they may go down, too.

Still in the hole

The government bunged £45 billion of taxpayer’s money at Royal Bank of Scotland Group in 2008, as the financial crisis thumped into the UK’s financial and economic system and banks found themselves air running like Wile E. Coyote, as the land gave way to the canyon.

Our government still finds itself saddled with around 80% of what was, at the time, a financial house of cards. RBS’s plans didn’t work out and that led to the nation’s bailout money seeing the government take ownership of the bank at about 502p per share, after the firm posted the biggest annual corporate loss in Britain’s entire history.

Today’s 360p or so shows how far there is still to travel if the government wants to get its money back. The situation seems even more dire when we consider that the shares floated around this level since early 2013 — more than two years. So why aren’t the shares making progress?

A double drag

UK-focused banks, such as RBS, face an ongoing double drag on share-price progress, which renders them unattractive as an investment proposition, or even as a ‘hold’.

There’s some evidence that regulators’ rhetoric is ratcheting up. Just this week news reports came through citing a senior Bank of England official saying that it will take another five years or more to make real inroads into the dominance of Britain’s five biggest banks. So, not only will regulators keep the banks in check, they will hack them down in size as well. That’s a powerful current dragging against a longer-term investment in RBS.

The other big problem for RBS and its peer banks is their close attachment to general macro-economic cycles. Banks are cyclical to the very core, and that’s what makes them dodgy buy-and-forget investments. Share prices in the sector rise and fall with profits, and cash flow in line with the undulations of the macro-economic cycle.

That’s why the stock market marks down the value of banks as we progress through the up-curve of the economic cycle — right now, in other words. There’s often gradual P/E compression in anticipation of the next peak-earnings event as the cycle unfolds. I think the valuation-compression effect we see with cyclical firms such RBS is the second drag against total investor returns for holders like the British Government.

End game

The longer we hold bank shares now, the closer we get to the end game. It won’t be pretty. The final big share price movement will likely begin with peak profits and end with share-price collapse near by. After that, it’s rinse and repeat. If he insists on waiting to get his money back, Ed Balls could be waiting a very long time…

Kevin Godbold has no position in any shares mentioned. The Motley Fool UK has no position in any of the shares mentioned. We Fools don't all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors.

More on Investing Articles

Friends and sisters exploring the outdoors together in Cornwall. They are standing with their arms around each other at the coast.
Investing Articles

£503 buys 14 shares in this FTSE 250 stock that returned 23.9% annually for the last 15 years

This FTSE 250 stock has averaged a huge return for 15 years. At today's price, £503 buys 14 shares. But…

Read more »

Black woman using loudspeaker to be heard
Investing Articles

£1,000 buys 25 shares in this FTSE 100 stock that’s returned 29.2% annually for the last 10 years

This FTSE 100 mining stock has returned close to 30% a year for a decade. At 3,995p, £1,000 buys 25…

Read more »

Female student sitting at the steps and using laptop
Investing Articles

Down 47%, is this growth stock finally worth buying in May?

With a £288m order book and a hidden pipeline of defence and nuclear contracts, is this growth stock now too…

Read more »

House models and one with REIT - standing for real estate investment trust - written on it.
Investing Articles

2 REITs yielding 7%+ to consider for passive income in 2026

A REIT backed by the NHS and another backed by Tesco and Sainsbury's with both yielding 7%+. Here's why I'm…

Read more »

Woman riding her old fashioned bicycle along the Beach Esplanade at Aberdeen, Scotland.
Investing Articles

Just 97 shares of this UK dividend stock generate £238 in passive income

A 5.7% yield, £238 in passive income from just 97 shares, and one of the most divisive dividend stocks on…

Read more »

ISA coins
Investing Articles

£10,000 in an ISA generates a second income of…

The London Stock Exchange is home to some of the world's most generous dividends. But how big a second income…

Read more »

Shot of a senior man drinking coffee and looking thoughtfully out of a window
Investing Articles

Expert recommendations: 2 top income stocks yielding 7%+!

With yields of 7.2% and 7.8% respectively, these two income stocks are catching the eyes of institutional analysts. Should investors…

Read more »

Illustration of flames over a black background
Investing Articles

3 top income-focused stocks to buy in May 2026, according to experts

Looking for a stock to buy for income in May 2026? Experts have flagged these three UK dividend shares as…

Read more »