Xia Yu was in Xiangjiang to build a financial market at a time when the British banking market was undergoing great changes.

The three major players in the Latin American sovereign debt crisis have been saving themselves, and the British government is also doing its best to help resolve the crisis.

But Barclays, NatWestminster and HSBC are in a very different position.

The best position is NatWest, which is not much different from Barclays, the largest bank, but has about three-fifths of its debt.

The old family behind the National Westminster Bank alone is certainly not the opponent of the Rothschild family, but together, in the UK, it will not be weaker than the Rothschild family, and it has the most ways to save itself, and the relationship with the British government is also the deepest.

The second best situation is not HSBC Holdings, but Barclays, which has the most debt in crisis.

Barclays has the most debt and the most risky, but the Rothschild family is too strong and has been raising money in a steady stream to deal with the run.

Although the Bright Fund has been manipulating public opinion behind the scenes, as time passed, Barclays Bank continued to come up with cash for depositors to withdraw, and over time, the panic of depositors gradually dissipated.

Therefore, after the market value of Barclays Bank fell below 4 billion pounds, although the market value is still shrinking, the rate of decline has slowed down significantly.

However, Barclays Bank has also reduced its total assets by more than $10 billion because it has been selling assets and allowing depositors to withdraw money.

HSBC Holdings is in the worst situation, for the simple reasons that Latin America has less debt but a high percentage of bank assets, and second, the shareholders behind the scenes are not as strong as Barclays and NatWestminster.

HSBC Holdings holds $6.94 billion in sovereign debt and has lent more than $7.53 billion to companies in Latin America and other countries, totaling $14.47 billion, less than six layers of Barclays and about $1.6 billion less than NatWestminster Bank.

However, before the outbreak of the crisis, HSBC Holdings' total bank assets were only about US$57.13 billion, and total deposits were about US$53.4 billion.

The total assets of the bank are equivalent to about 65 percent of the bank's bank, and the total deposits are equivalent to about 66 percent of the bank's bank.

But risk debt as a percentage of the bank's total assets reached 25.3 percent, which is 1.5 percent less than Barclays' 26.8 percent.

And that's not even more serious.

HSBC Holdings is the parent company of HSBC Bank, which is the core subsidiary of HSBC Holdings, accounting for more than four layers of HSBC Holdings' total assets.

However, the sovereign debt and risk loans held by HSBC Bank of Hong Kong together occupy less than two layers of HSBC Holdings.

If the debts and assets of HSBC are divested.

HSBC Holdings' risk-to-risk debt ratio has reached a staggering 40%!

Far surpasses Barclays' National Westminster Bank!

This kind of insider data is something that HSBC Holdings in the UK is trying to hide.

But who made the Bright Fund one of the shareholders of HSBC Holdings in the UK, George Berkeley also specially calculated in secret, so naturally people had already figured out the situation, and secretly ordered people to send these hidden data to non-bright newspapers.

Therefore, after the hidden data was exposed, HSBC Holdings fell into dire straits, becoming the largest bank closest to bankruptcy.

The British government has done its best to support HSBC Holdings, and the major shareholders behind the bank have also been forced to bail out.

But even so, it still can't stop the rapid loss of HSBC Holdings' assets.

HSBC Holdings' total assets have fallen below US$50 billion, which makes the risk-liability ratio of HSBC Holdings in the UK reach more than 55 percent.

Even if it did not go bankrupt, HSBC Holdings has become a junk stock, and its market value has shrunk extremely seriously, from the original market value of more than 4.3 billion pounds before the outbreak of the crisis to directly fall below one billion pounds.

But stocks are still uninterested.

It's just too risky to go bankrupt.

At this time, more than 3,000 banks around the world were involved in the Latin American sovereign debt crisis, and few of the big banks in Europe and the United States escaped.

For example, among the four major banks in the UK, only Lloyds Bank was lucky to escape, and the assets of other banks are less than one another, and it is too late to hide from HSBC Holdings.

Lloyd's Bank, which survived the catastrophe, also did not dare to jump into the pit.

If you want to take over, you will just wait for HSBC Holdings to go bankrupt and grab some high-quality assets.

However, what makes many people dumbfounded is that there are really people who dare to take over HSBC Holdings.

That's Bright Fund, one of the UK's largest financial institutions!

At the beginning, Bright Fund was just buying HSBC Holdings' shares in the stock market, and no one noticed it.

And Bright Fund itself is a shareholder and director of HSBC Holdings, and there is no need to disclose the increase in shares.

It was not until the Bright Fund absorbed more than 30 percent of the equity in the stock market within two days and increased the shareholding ratio to more than 35 percent that it was found out by the institution and caused heated discussions.

But HSBC Holdings' share price has also struggled.

Because when George Berkeley did not mobilize media resources to create positive public opinion, public opinion was generally not optimistic about the actions of the Bright Fund.

That's exactly what George Berkeley wanted.

He approached Margaret Thatcher directly, and after some negotiations, he received strong support from the British government.

Then, with the help of the British government, he approached the shareholders of HSBC Holdings who had not yet sold their shares.

It's not that these shareholders don't want to sell their stocks, they also worry about the tens of billions of dollars in debt that will be implicated in the bank's bankruptcy, and the rest of the family's assets will be added to it.

But the big shareholders are all under the watchful eye of the British government, prohibiting them from selling shares that make the situation worse, and allowing them to raise money to keep HSBC Holdings' capital chain.

This makes these shareholders envious of those institutions with loose shares and small holdings, and at the same time, they are miserable.

Now the British government has lifted the ban on them, allowing them to privately transfer their shares to the Bright Fund to take over, and they all agreed, and proposed that they must be transferred at real-time stock price parity.

As for the premium?

No one dared to mention it, after all, if they were to sell the stock from the stock market, it would definitely be enough to collapse the stock price again, and they would not be able to sell all their shares.

Now it can be transferred at a low price, which is a very high requirement.

It's just that George Berkeley is not stupid, he seized the opportunity to push down the price, and these shareholders had to pinch their noses and agree, and in the end, all the shares added up and bought them at an average of 92% off the current price.

Subsequently, with the assistance of the China Securities Regulatory Commission, Bright Fund quickly completed the privatization.

The entire operation cost a total of 784.26 million pounds, and HSBC Holdings, which had a market value of more than 4.66 billion pounds before the crisis, was bought.

The whole process only took 18 days!

The efficiency is eye-catching.

However, with HSBC Holdings being wholly owned by Bright Fund, this also means that more than $10 billion of risk debt is also shrouded in Bright Fund.

Once HSBC Holdings goes bankrupt, then the parent company, Bright Fund, will have to fill in with assets.

This has also led to the worries of investors in some private or public funds opened by Bright Fund, and some are even ready to redeem their funds so as not to be dragged down by Bright Fund.

However, George Berkeley was not panicked, he had already considered this, so he had already applied for help from Xia Yu, and it was only after receiving Xia Yu's instructions that he dared to go to Margaret Thatcher to make a major commitment.

On the second day after Bright Fund wholly owned HSBC Holdings, Bright Fund held a press conference with HSBC Holdings and the Governor of the Bank of England, which was broadcast live by the BBC.

At the press conference, George Berkeley announced that the company's shareholders jointly raised $10 billion and deposited all of them into HSBC Holdings' accounts without using the company's funds, expressing their support and trust in HSBC Holdings.

At the press conference, deposit slips were also displayed, and the governor of the Bank of England testified on the spot that the Bright Fund had indeed deposited $10 billion of funds into the bank account of HSBC Holdings.

It was precisely because George Berkeley came up with this practical plan when he found Margaret Thatcher that he received the full support of the British government.

After the press conference, the whole of the UK was shocked by the magnanimity of the Bright Fund, and the crisis of HSBC Holdings was directly suppressed to a minimum.

Subsequently, the influence quickly spread to the world, and the name of the Bright Fund completely resounded all over the world.

In fact, the $10 billion fund was jointly collected by the Royal Bank of Scotland, Standard Chartered Bank, Jiuding Bank, Chiba Bank of the Island State, Wells Fargo Bank of the United States, and other banks, and then temporarily and secretly lent to the Bright Fund, which was deposited into HSBC Holdings.

The reason why these banks are not allowed to come forward to support HSBC Holdings is that they do not want to expose their strength, and second, the identity of the banks is too sensitive, involving HSBC Holdings, which is mired in the quagmire, and if public opinion is not well controlled, it is easy to drag these banks into the water.

Therefore, Xia Yu chose to put the Bright Fund at the forefront, and at the same time took this opportunity to let the Bright Fund advertise all over the world.

As it turned out, the effect of this 10 billion dollar advertisement was extremely amazing.

At least one point, Margaret Thatcher has a deeper understanding of Xia Yu's strength, after all, she can mobilize 10 billion US dollars of liquidity in a short period of time, and there are very few people with this ability.

Bright Fund acquired HSBC Holdings in the United Kingdom, and naturally owned 54.7% of the equity of its subsidiary HSBC Bank.

In addition, Jiuding Securities Company now holds a 39.7% stake in Heung Kong HSBC.

HSBC has been controlled by Xia Yu 94.4 percent of the shares, and the remaining small part is scattered in the Xiangjiang stock market.

When the bigwigs in the political and business circles were still lamenting the change of ownership of the British HSBC Holdings and the strength of the Bright Fund, they did not know that Xia Yu had firmly sat on the hegemony of the banking industry in Xiangjiang.

The largest Jiuding Bank in Xiangjiang, the second largest HSBC Bank in Xiangjiang and the third largest Standard Chartered Bank are all Xia Yu's!

PS: It's the beginning of the month, ask for a recommended ticket monthly pass, I wish you all a happy Mid-Autumn Festival! Happy reunion!

n.