RBS/NatWest: cosmetic rebranding or southern power grab?
Earlier this month, Royal Bank of Scotland indicated that its new boss, Alison Rose, would be based solely in London. Now we know why she chose to become “Queen of the South”, said The Times. After 293 years, the lender – still HQ’ed in Edinburgh – is ditching its RBS name and rebranding itself “NatWest”, in an overhaul designed to put its 2008 bailout, and a string of recent scandals, behind it. Existing RBS branches, most of which are in Scotland, will keep their name, as will Ulster Bank in Northern Ireland.
“Switching its name to NatWest brings Royal Bank of Scotland full circle,” said Lex in the FT. Two decades ago, when RBS “pounced” on the English bank for a then record £22bn, “NatWest was a toxic name with a horrid history”. RBS subsequently “proceeded to prove itself every bit as flawed”, and only survives today thanks to a £45.5bn state bailout. Pre-tax profits rose 26% last year to £4.2bn. But you can’t change history. “For all the shiny hopefulness from a new-old name, a new chief executive and a promised new era – RBS still looks like tarnished goods.” The UK government’s 62.4% stake “weighs on the share price”.
According to Ian Fraser, author of Shredded: Inside RBS, the Bank that Broke Britain, this is little more than a cosmetic change: the real power has long been in London. Indeed, should a second Scottish independence referendum deliver a Yes vote, the lender would consider removing its headquarters from Edinburgh completely, said Greg Russell in The National. Some Scots are furious about what they see as a Sassenach attack on their financial heritage, said The Times. The move was slammed by one former SNP MP, Paul Monaghan, as “a very poor decision that will cost RBS thousands of customers and many jobs”.