Yeah, let's begin this Thursday edition of the Sportsmax Zone with a football head coach of Jamaica's national under-20 male team, John Wall, says that schoolboy football is not the vehicle to sustainable player development in the country. He says the premier competition for under-20 players in Jamaica doesn't mold players into the standard needed to transition to the senior level. Unfortunately, I cannot relate to schoolboy football, converting that to global football. I cannot. It's a different game. So for me, I have to look at how we can recreate it in our environment, and therefore trying to access it in all zones as possible. And that is done through scouts and others, assess the players and so forth. Globally, we're already pretty much fully operative on people who are voluntarily scouting for us and looking and providing scout reports. So I'm pretty close to actually delivering the 60-man squad that will be the provincial list sent to CONCA cap. And from that point, that's going to be the player selecting. Wall also cited how huge the golf is between the Jamaican schoolboy football level and the world standard. How do you convert schoolboy football to a global game? You don't really. You have to bring up a magic wand sometimes. It's not really in the context of the global game. That's the hard thing. Yes, there will be some players, but I'm not going to mention them by names. But senior professional needs is a starting point. JPL is a semi-professional league to the point right now, but I would love it to become a full professional league. You have to strive and improve. Yeah, Jamaica's national under-20 head coach, John Wall, planted to unpack, of course. And so we turn to a man who has tremendous experience as a player, as an administrator, our own sportsmax analyst, Brent Sancho. Brent, I just want to get your initial reaction to the thoughts of John Wall, the head coach of Jamaica's national under-20 team. Good afternoon, Ricardo, and Lance, and to all your viewers. He's spot on. He's spot on, and it's correct in what he's saying. And it's something that has, well, I don't want to use a word plague, but it's something that has challenged not just Jamaica, but throughout the Caribbean. How do we develop our best talent, our young talent, into future international stars, into future club stars, and transitioning from high school football into other domains? And it is a challenge. Back in the day, Ricardo, yes, we would have had one or two that would have left the SSFL, schoolboy football in Jamaica, Grenada, St. Lucia, wherever. I may have gone on to scholarships, may one or two, gone on to the professional ranks, I think. But you're talking about the modern day game and things have changed drastically. And coach John Wall is very, very correct in what he's saying is that schoolboy football cannot be a developmental pathway for our players. Yeah, Brent, can you break down a little bit more as to why schoolboy football cannot be that developmental pathway, specifically as it relates to what it is lacking? Yeah, there are tremendous amounts of deficiencies in schoolboy football that does not run in line with what is Okara with the rest of the world. I think first and foremost, Ricardo, the level of the games. When you look at the type of games that these boys play throughout the season, maybe three or four of those games are high-intensity games, games that they challenge both mentally and physically, and the demands are up there, but still not close enough to what you would see at the international level. And even if you look at the time frame of the league, the league runs for approximately three to four months, and that's it. In most places around the world, football in countries around the world, contact time with a football is roughly about 15 to 20 hours a week. We don't see that in the Caribbean, and again, that's a challenge that comes with schoolboy football. And I just think the entire environment is not one conducive for development of a young player to play on the world stage, and I think that's the key, Ricardo, to play on the world stage. It's not conducive for something like that. So when you look at those two to three points that I've mentioned there, of course there's more. That, in itself, tells you the challenge that people like John Wall and other coaches at the U-20 level will have, and even U-17 have as it relates to schoolboy football and the thought process, that that should be enough to give a young man the international experience to go out and beat a Costa Rica or USA and Mexico. Yeah, let me take the discussion from a different point of view, Brent, because there is the school of thought. Let's use the Jamaican context, for example, the Intersecondary School Sports Association ISSA is responsible for organizing schoolboy competitions, which includes football. Their remit is not necessarily to develop the game of football in the country, but is to give student athletes at the high school level an opportunity to express and show off their talent, which they get the opportunity to do. And it's also competition among schools, which is important for the overall development of students. So it's not necessarily from the standpoint of ISSA, and I suspect other such bodies across the Caribbean about producing world-class players, but it is giving the students who are under their guidance an opportunity to enjoy themselves, to showcase their talent, whatever the case may be. And so the school of thought extends beyond that, that it is the national associations, the TTFA, the Jamaica Football Federation, Grenada Football, whatever the case may be, who have fallen short in building on what schoolboy football produces or gives them the opportunity to do. I get the feeling, though, that it is being suggested that schoolboy football, and I hope I'm wrong, that schoolboy football is just a complete waste of time. Take me up on that one. Well, first and foremost, I don't think it's the fault of the association. I think it's the clubs that are required to develop talent anywhere in the world. It's the clubs that are the ones that are recommended and given the task of developing young talent. Schoolboy football certainly has never said once that they are a pathway or they are the beacon for developing the young talent. So you're right on that side. But I think the clubs throughout the Caribbean has fallen short in that department. And when you look at any club structure around the Caribbean, they have what I would call a skeleton department when it comes to youth football, and they are very short on what is demanded worldwide for developing young talent, simply because they don't have the funds. I mean, that's the fact. And because of that, that is why you've seen that shortfall. Yes, the association can start putting together more meaningful youth tournaments and maybe trying to guide the footballing pyramid in a particular way where so much emphasis is put on to school football. Yes, that can happen. But I think before that happened, you have to understand what is required to develop a plan. I think that development comes from club structure and club football throughout the country in the region. Yeah, a couple of things. I just want to make the point that John Wall had said that part of the issue he was having or is having is that it is difficult to get players who operate at the schoolboy football level, international training sessions throughout the schoolboy football season. And that is a problem. So they may want to have camps, but because they are involved in schoolboy competition, then the coaches don't necessarily want to release them. And at least in the Jamaican case where a lot of these teams and especially the top teams and therefore the best players start preparing from around April, May. And so you are looking at about 78 months where you may not be able to access the players in the way you want. I'm glad, though, Brent, that you went to the point about the clubs and they are the ones who should be responsible for developing a lot of the talent. I'm also happy that you spoke about the fact that they are struggling financially, and that's part of the reason they have been unable to do it. The high school system, though, and not just for football, but so many sports is able to garner significantly more support, whether it be because of their past student associations or whatever else, but they are able to garner the support. Is there a way, because the support comes through the schools, that there can be a developmental pathway that is unique and specific to the Caribbean situation, or is it just that this is not going to work? I don't think it will work, and I'll tell you why. I just feel that because it's a school and at the end of the day, any student athlete that attends a school, their first priority is to be scholastically on par and doing what is recommended throughout the school. A school sport is an extra curricular activity, and that's the key word there, that that is something extra given from the school. A football club is designed and structured to develop talent and to move talent upwards to their senior portfolio and then hopefully sell them on. So they're talking about chalk and cheese here, two separate, completely separate entities that have different endgame, different desires and different wants in where they're headed. Yes, there is a lot of emphasis on winning because us as human beings have that emphasis placed on these kids placed on these schools because of the rivalry, because of the history as part of it. It does not denounce the fact that it is not the correct place for a young man to develop his talent. In fact, I was fast to say, we would, we would go, we would do very well on this program if we had to name schools throughout this world, the top level football teams, that be England, Brazil, et cetera, that players are now applying their training. All players come through the academy for a reason because it's designed that way to develop talent. Yeah, very much the case, Lance, what do you think about this? I think Brent is on the right track because if you talk about players in their late teens and even in their early twenties and you talk about like qualifying for a world under 20 football and so on, when teams from the Caribbean assemble an under 20 squad to face, you know, top teams in Concacat and if they go beyond that to the world level, they're up against 19, 20 year olds who are in big clubs, big clubs like Barcelona and. Yeah, but clubs that are well funded though. And I think that's the real issue in the Caribbean context that our clubs are not well funded. I understand that, but it just puts our backs against the wall because there's no quick fix to the situation. Because Brent, I understand the point you're making. And there has been a school of thought. I know that it would be problematic to get this done. But if you have elite 17, 18 year olds in the Caribbean who are obviously talented beyond schoolboy football level, how then would you extract those players from a school system and put them into a program to to achieve their, their, their highest levels? Because as you mentioned at the top Brent, schoolboy football isn't going to do it. We saw the John Whisper Richards last year representing Kingston College and he was just walking through the opponents because they didn't challenge him. So a player like, like him is, is really settling when he at 17, 18 is playing schoolboy football, when he needs to be challenged to lift his, his talent to higher levels. Well, I first tell you the reality, the reality that we face now is a talent like Whisper and others of that help will have to find pastures outside of the region. That's a fact. What I believe should happen is that we need to as a Caribbean, whether it be at the CFU level or at the country level, develop academies, national academies. That is the only way. The challenge that you have with a regional academy or national academy is then where are these kids and who are these kids going to play against? Yes, it's all good to train and of course be able to try to develop your skills in a training environment. But a big part of player development is also playing those sorts of games, high level games, weekend week out, where they emulate that. And that I think is where the finances come in, because you surely won't get it in the region. They will have to go overseas to get that sort of competition. And one of the benefits that Whisper Richards has, Brent, is that he was being guided by a Craig Butler who understands that schoolboy football cannot provide the genre Whisper Richards with the kind of a development platform that he needs to get to Chelsea, where he is now. He just, to me, played last season in Manningham Football in Jamaica as a token because Butler recognized that his level was way beyond that. And I think he is a good example of being in an academy that understands that schoolboy football cannot, by itself, in its present structure, take a player to high levels of football in Europe and some of the best places in the world. And Lance, I'll go even further. I've covered the SSFL now for probably back about six, seven years, and I have seen players, high-calibre players, and I think can move on to the next level stagnated because they stayed in schoolboy football too long. And again, this is not an indictment on school football as an organization. It's an indictment on the level that they play. If a kid is at 18, 19, running past a left back that's 14 and 15, how is that going to help him develop? And that is what transpires sometimes in schoolboy football. The fact of the matter is for a talent to develop, they have to be in the right environment. And I think that's exactly what coach John Wall was eluding to, creating that right environment for a player to develop and that environment is certainly not in schoolboy football. Yeah, and just to reiterate the point that I was making, I think Craig Butler's Phoenix Academy and how he has operated with Dejean Whisper Richards fully understands that. And they are a handful of other players who may not be as good as Richards is, but are quality players and have a lot of potential, as you just mentioned, but they are stagnating in schoolboy football at the moment because they have been retained by their schools to try to win titles. And that I think is a problem as we try to look forward to develop our players. But it is a topic that has been discussed constantly, Brent, I see that Tyree Spicer, your former standout player in the SSFL, is the number one MLS draft pick now for Toronto. I would like a quick comment from you about how you saw him in the SSFL and his development since that because he's now a high profile player as in his early 20s in the MLS or having an MLS opportunity. Well, look, he's one of those kids that if you saw him in high school, you probably you probably would not have thought if he stayed in Trinidad that he would have gotten to the stage that he got into. In fact, I'm going further Lancet, you know, speaking to other college coaches, they thought he was a bit too raw when I had recommended him to one or two. The fact of the matter is there was an explosion of talent, of development between his leaving Trinidad and going to the States and playing university football for those four years. And that is exactly the point that we're making here in the program is that when a kid goes out into the right environment and that's what Lipscomb provided for Tyrese, he put on size, he became physically better, he became mentally better in the way he is thinking in the game and the way he approached football games and all of that transpired during his time outside of Trinidad. Not saying that the coaches at his former school were not good coaches, but I think in the environment that he was in, they could have only taken him so far. The rest came when he went to university. Yeah, well, Brent, I'm with you on that one. You did make an excellent point earlier on when he spoke about the academies being developed across the region. But the problem with that is who do they play against? We've seen a lot of that in Jamaica, by the way, where a number of academies have popped up across the country and a number of youngsters went to those academies, but they had no body to play against. They had no competitions to play in. You know what happened, Brent? They all found a school and came back to school for football. And so you, when you, when you do the matches, you see a lot of players transferred from Mount Pleasant, transferred from here, transferred from that academy and they're playing high school football and that is part of the problem in the Caribbean. But yeah, we can continue to have this discussion. Brent, it's a pleasure. We appreciate you enlightening us on this one. And I think we are better for this discussion, at least in our understanding of this issue. Thanks very much. I'm a great one, guys. All right. Let's go to a break. We're back with more on the sports man zone after this.


Hello, today I'm on Plasma. Yesterday I tried to do these six things only using the keyboard on GNOME. It went pretty well. It took like five minutes. Now I'll try to do the same thing but on KD Plasma. And hopefully the fact that I know KD Plasma a bit better than GNOME means that it will be even easier, but well, we'll see. Let's see. So let's just open Dolphin as an example and that was the first one. Pretty easy. We need to close it, but that should be CTRL W and that's super easy. Okay, the second one is hopefully just as easy. We can gotta say though I like GNOME and everything, but switching between apps using the keyboard is much, much easier in KD Plasma. As you've seen like yesterday, in yesterday's video on GNOME, I just couldn't focus the application grid in KD Plasma. I couldn't do this and then with the right arrow I can switch between these. Much, much easier. So let's add Anki and hopefully the shortcut was like Shift FN10 for the context menu and of course that doesn't work, which might mean that the context menu shortcut is different but also maybe that it's not implemented in Plasma. That's not good because I don't know how. What about this one? Oh, it worked. It worked. So my keyboard does actually have a context menu button. If I press FN and right CTRL, there is this button that actually opens up a context menu. So that worked and then I just go with Pintu Dust Manager and that's it. Done. That was not work. Then connect to Wi-Fi. Again, in theory, we should be able to focus the panel and the Wi-Fi and by the way, as you've seen in KD News video from Monday, Tuesday, there's actually a way to do it but I want it's not yet implemented in my system. I don't have that merge request yet. Still, it will be possible to do it in the future. But for now, since I don't know of any shortcut that actually opens the, I don't know, maybe the system tree, I'll just do settings as I've done for GNOME as well. And we can search for Wi-Fi. This is the Wi-Fi. Yes. And then, yes, this isn't exactly how I hoped the Wi-Fi thing would go. And we go and select, okay. Thank you. This is very interesting. Can I actually select something on the Wi-Fi list? Apparently not. Let's try to search for password and how do I actually select the first result? Oh, come on. Okay. This is not good. This is actually harder than a third. This is a thing. Okay. So we're actually focusing the buttons on the bottom. Yeah. That's not interesting. Thank you. Cancel. Plus, minus, settings, search bar, plus, minus. How do I actually connect though? How you have to use the applet? Like, there's no way to connect from here unless I click on some button that I don't see. Yeah. I think I have to use the applet. Unless I don't know Wi-Fi, Wi-Fi, Wi-Fi, nope. It's connections. And, well, it's this one. But how do I actually open the applet without the merge request? Because after the merge request, it would be easy, but I don't have it yet. So it's not. Okay. I kind of have a plan. So let's actually try to open up the shortcuts KCM, which is this one, and search for something that might help us. So I don't know why. What? Okay. Thank you. Wi-Fi system tray. Nope. No. Nope. Nothing interesting really. What about, I don't know, connection? And I mean, I can't even focus the least. Trouble. Trouble. So I think I need to give up on this one. I'm not able to do this. Let's try the other one. Move window to another virtual desktop. And as yesterday, this is easy. I know that moving between desktops is meta control. It's meta alt, no meta control on KD Plasma. And to actually move a window, it's meta control, shift like this. And it works. Five, activate do not disturb. And hopefully, hopefully it's on the notifications page. Do not disturb mode, toggle with, there's currently no shortcut associated with do not disturb. I guess I can add one. Do I have to add one? Is there no other way to actually turn on? Because I mean, I should open the popup of the notification to actually enable do not disturb, but I can't. So I need to set shortcut like meta control alt E or now I need to actually click on apply. Oh, no. Will I be able to actually click on apply though? Yes. And then meta alt control E. And just like this, I managed to actually change do not disturb mode. So that's done. That worked. And I lost my here. It's here. Lastly, let's switch because it's implicit switch to thanks and stop OBS. So first of all, we go to OBS, which is here. Hello, OBS.  Oh, no, no, I'll turn back. Okay. That was much easier for some reason. Yesterday it was harder. And well, now I will show the animation with all of the thanks you. And then as soon as that one ends, I will get back to the, you know, showing my screen and actually try to stop the recording. But till then, thanks to all of the people who are donating to my channel, and that is a super nice things to do that makes you like a good person. TM about Nicholas approved person. And now that is done. Let's switch back to the green screen. And now it's again, tapping L until I find this one. So thanks for following along. This video is three minutes longer, but unlikely I couldn't do a task. If you are able to connect to Wi-Fi only using keyboard shortcuts, please tell me how because I just couldn't find it and props to GNOME that actually put all of the stuff in system settings too, even if it's also in the system tree, because yeah, it's a bit easier to actually use it only using keyboard shortcuts. So props to GNOME for that. But also KDPLASM, I think kickoff really wins in terms of actually, you know, using this thing to select an application. And I managed to, okay, bye, bye.


Hello and welcome to the session. In this session we discussed the following question which says, determine the value of lambda so that the following linear equations have no solution. 1 plus 3 lambda whole into x plus 3 y is equal to 2, lambda square plus 1 whole into x plus lambda minus 2 whole into y is equal to 5. So we are given these two equations and we need to find the value of this lambda such that these two equations have no solution. First let's see what is the condition for a given system of equations such that it has no solution. Consider the system of equations A1x plus B1y plus C1 equal to 0, A2x plus B2y plus C2 equal to 0. If this system of equations have no solution then A1 upon A2 is equal to B1 upon B2 is not equal to C1 upon C2. This is the key idea that we use in this question. Now let's move on to the solution. The given system of equations is 1 plus 3 lambda whole into x plus 3y is equal to 2. Let this be equation 1. Then the other equation given is lambda square plus 1 whole into x plus lambda minus 2 whole into y is equal to 5. Let this be equation 2. Now first of all we write the equations 1 and 2 in the form such that all the terms from the right hand side are shifted to the left hand side and we get a 0 on the right hand side. So we rewrite the equation 1 as 1 plus 3 lambda whole into x plus 3y minus 2 equal to 0. We take this as equation 3. Then in the same way we rewrite the equation 2 as lambda square plus 1 whole into x plus lambda minus 2 whole into y minus 5 equal to 0. We take this as equation 4. Let us find out A1, A2, B1, B2 and C1, C2. Let's compare this equation 3. The equation A1 x plus B1 y plus C1 equal to 0. So we get A1 is equal to 1 plus 3 lambda, B1 is equal to 3, C1 is equal to minus 2. Then we compare equation 4 and equation A2 x plus B2 y plus C2 we get A2 is equal to lambda square plus 1, B2 is equal to lambda minus 2 and C2 is equal to minus 5. So we have got A1, B1, C1, A2, B2, C2. So the given system of equations will have no solution. A1 upon A2 is equal to B1 upon B2 is not equal to C1 upon C2. We put the values for A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2.   First let's consider this, that is 1 plus 3 lambda upon lambda square plus 1 is equal to 3 upon lambda minus 2. This gives us 1 plus 3 lambda into lambda minus 2 is equal to 3 into lambda square plus 1. This further gives us 3 lambda square minus 6 lambda plus lambda minus 2 is equal to 3 lambda square plus 3. We have 3 lambda square minus 5 lambda minus 2 is equal to 3 lambda square plus 3. Now from here we get 3 lambda square minus 5 lambda minus 2 minus 3 lambda square is equal to 3. Now 3 lambda square minus 3 lambda square cancels. So we have minus 5 lambda is equal to 3 plus 2 which gives us minus 5 lambda is equal to 5. Further we have lambda is equal to 5 upon minus 5 5 and 5 cancels and this is equal to minus 1. Therefore lambda is equal to minus 1. Now the other condition that we had was 3 upon lambda minus 2 is not equal to minus 2 upon minus 5 that is 3 upon lambda minus 2 is not equal to 2 upon 5 and this condition is true for lambda is equal to minus 1. So as we say the given system of equations will have no solution for lambda is equal to minus 1. So this complete C session I hope you have understood the solution for this question.


Let us look at the thermodynamic definition of work. This is required because various branches of physics define the work interaction in different ways and we have to have a proper definition so that we accept some interaction as work interaction. The requirement for work to be considered as work interaction in thermodynamics are as follows. First one, the interaction must be an energy interaction and it should be between two systems. So two systems must be involved system A system B for a system and its surroundings. Second one is that this interaction must be completely reducible to the rays of a weight. By weight we mean some mass m in a gravitational field, this must be raised against the force of gravity. So the rays of a weight that is mass in a gravitational field, it is considered the basic idea of work and hence we consider that to be a work interaction provided that interaction is completely reducible to the rays of a weight. And for this complete reduction, there is a qualification, this should be by primitive means. That means means which are defined in other branches of physics. For example, we can use chains and pulleys, we can use pistons and cylinders, we can use gears, we can use block and tackle, we can use anything which is properly defined. Important thing to note is idealizations are acceptable. In the sense we can consider massless, inertia less, friction less pulleys. We can consider 100% efficient electrical generators and electrical motors. We can consider friction less movement. We can consider inflexible massless strings. All idealization is possible. However, black box approach, saying well I have something which will do it for me, that is not acceptable. Thank you.


Hello and welcome to the Gary Stewart Show. I'm Joe Wamba, joined with Gary Stewart, head coach of the men's basketball team. And coach, this past week, you get some solid performances out of one guy, Cameron Hayes, 20 points against Lebanon Valley and 14 against Arcadia at home this week. Our freshmen continue to improve. And Cameron's at the forefront of that, played excellent. I thought both games. He's doing a lot of the things that we're asking him to do in practice. You see that now come into fruition. He's got a bright future. Another one in that same class, freshman Mark Terrell, coming off the bench and contributing a lot. Mark was really good against Lebanon Valley. He established himself down in the interior. What we like about him is his versatility.  Yeah, I've seen him step out even in practice. And then in the game, when he steps out for the three-pointers, it just goes in. It's a wonderful shot. Yeah, he's got an excellent feel for offense. And he's certainly capable, and we want him to look for those opportunities.  Yeah, I think both of our benchmen are playing really well. Ben Weibosch has given us a real push at the start of games with his energy, and he's a cerebral guy, very talented, excellent shooter. He figures brightly in our future plans. And Benjamin Young is so active and runs really well. He's got great hands. His best basketball is certainly ahead of him. And when we talk about this bench, I'm sure a good guy's coming off the bench and contributing, but it is kind of a short bench. You guys have been bit by the injury bug this year. Yeah, we have. Started 15 minutes into practice, and we lost for the season one of our better student athletes and Cameron Harrison. We've kind of been real in sense. Ryan Hill, as a person that we were leaning on heavily, he injured himself early, has not made it back yet. Cliff Cornish has struggled with injuries. We lost Taj Fleming here last week to a knee injury. Elijah Early is a freshman that has not played yet, working his way back. So we've had several people that figure prominently in what we want to do, get banged up a little bit at the start. It's tough, but you guys have been able to get contributions across the board for the guys that do get the suit up and play. What we've done is gone to the next person, and we've gotten some viable minutes and great contribution from a variety of people, and I hope that that continues. And now let's move into the contest that you guys have coming up. You're off this week as far as a midweek game goes. Come back against a non-conference game with Goucher.  The next five games are all on the road for you. They are, and some difficult venues. Goucher played very well last year against us, and we'll have our hands full there. And then York is five and two, and playing very well in the capital athletic conference. We get the Christmas break, and then on to Atlanta. And that Atlanta trip will be awfully important, as far as it's a team building experience, no doubt, when you get to do these types of trips. And it's going to be special for the guys traveling to Atlanta. Yeah, we really look forward to a trip like this, because it offers us a chance to get out of the region and see some other competition. We get to be together morning, noon, and night. So that's always a good thing. And it's very important that we work our way back to where we need to be, because conference picks up again in January. Yeah, that second half of the conference schedule is going to be widely important. And these games are going to be able to gear you up for that second half of the contest, as you make a push to get seated into the Commonwealth tournament. Yeah, we want to play in thirds. And so we've had a third of the year now is behind us. And so we're looking forward to the next chapter. And we talked to the guys after the game on Saturday about not worrying about the blind horse, just loaded the carriage, continued to be immersed in improvement. And we're really enthusiastic about what the future will bring. Well, coach, we share that enthusiasm with you and wish you the best of luck in this stretch of road games. We won't talk to you until 2017. That's just the way the schedule is working out for us. But we wish you the best of luck, these stretch of games coming up. Thank you, Joe. And happy holidays to you and everybody out there. Same to you and your family and your team's families as well. Thank you, Joe. He's Gary Steward. I'm Joe Wamba, and this has been the Gary Steward Show.


Being in the Navy you have to be prepared for anything because the situation can go from zero to one hundred in an instant. Search and rescue swimmers are a requirement for every US Navy ship. You know you want to show that you know what you're doing and that you can save a life if the time comes you have to do it. While it's important to be fit, star swimming tests more than just your physical strength. You never know when something's going to happen so you're always just you have to be mentally prepared to go at any time. Mental attitude, if you're in shape, can't be afraid of the water, you have to know how to swim, but if you want it bad enough, you know nothing's hard enough. Thanks to their attitude and training these sailors are prepared to uphold their motto so others may live. Petty Officer Christina Coffey, Fleet Activities, Sasebo, Japan.


Good morning, everybody. Welcome to this press conference on banking supervision. Let me introduce our main speakers who you know, of course, the chair of the Supervisory Board, Danielle Nui, and to her right, the vice chair, Sabine Lautenschläger. They will both make brief introductory remarks. We're holding this press conference today on the occasion of the release of the annual report on Supervisory activities, which covers our first full year of operations. As you know, the report was presented yesterday to the European Parliament by Miss Nui, who was in Brussels for that occasion. She will say a few words on behalf of all of us on the events that happened there yesterday before we go into the introductory statements. Danielle, please. Thank you, Connie. Good morning, everybody. Let me take this opportunity to express our deep sympathy to the victims and their families of the tragic events yesterday morning in Brussels. I speak on behalf of all of us when I say that we feel great sorrow and also great solidarity with the people of Brussels on Belgium. Such events remind us how important it is to stand together in Europe. Our thoughts are with the victims and their families. With that, let me return to my preparatory preliminary statement. I welcome you to our press conference on the ECB annual report on supervisory activities for 2015. Having already presented the report at the European Parliament in Brussels yesterday, I would like to take the opportunity today to look beyond the annual report on beyond 2015. Early this year, the banking sector took centre stage when volatility increased and bank share prices dropped. In that line, I find it reassuring that European banks have become much more resilient over the past few years by significantly increasing their capital ratios. Since 2012, the CET1 ratio, for instance, has moved from 9% to 13%. Still, the recent episode of volatility revealed uncertainty on the part of investors, not necessarily with regard to banks' resilience, but rather to banks' profitability. Against the backdrop of a continuing period of low interest rates, a weakening global economy ailing emerging markets on plunging oil prices. Many investors worry about the ability of banks to adjust their business model and sustain their profitability. We too see the adjustment of business models as the biggest challenge of the European banking sector. Other challenges include credit risk on a certain levels of non-performing loans, a reversal of the search for yield, conduct on governance risk, sovereign risk, geopolitical risk, growing vulnerabilities in emerging economies, as well as IT on cybercrime. Based on this risk, we have defined five priorities that will guide our supervisory work in 2016. First, we will look at banks' business models on profitability. Second, we will look at credit risk, particularly with regard to non-performing loans. In that connection, we established a dedicated working group last year, which had been tasked with supporting a reduction in the stocks of non-performing loans. Third, we will look at capital adequacy. For example, with regard to bailing capital. Fourth, we will look at risk management on governance. Given the current environment of very low interest rates on abundant liquidity, it is increasingly important that banks manage their risk appropriately. On fifth, we will look at liquidity. That said, I'm certain that banks would add another challenge, namely the need to cope with many changes in the regulatory framework. Yes, there have been a number of changes, and yes, efforts are required in adapting to them. We understand that and we strive for regulatory certainty in order to enable banks to plan accordingly and address risk appropriately. Nevertheless, we should not forget where we have come from, namely a fragmented banking sector in Europe on a global financial crisis. Against that backdrop, regulatory reform was necessary. What has been done had to be done. The new capital on liquidity requirements have increased the resilience of individual banks of the entire banking system. Systemically, we are in a much stronger position that we were before the last crisis. Wherever the next storm blows in from, banks will be more resilient. And if a bank does fail, the new bailing rules will protect taxpayers. That in turn realises incentives for investors. The increase in spreads for certain capital instruments is a sign that markets are adjusting to these new rules. Moreover, Basel Tree, the centrepiece of regulatory reform, is about to be finalised in 2016. There will be no significant further increase in capital requirement. And we are not discussing Basel IV, the regulatory reform is coming to an end. It has paved the way towards a more stable banking system. Granted, it has been a long journey and not an easy one. The crisis has undermined confidence in banks and it will take time and effort to fully restore it. The recent outburst of volatility was a case in point. We as supervisors contribute together with regulators to restoring confidence in the banking system. But the banks themselves need to make sure they have viable business models and the banks themselves have to manage their risk prudently. Acknowledging this and acting accordingly is another necessary step towards the objective of a stable banking system that serves the real economy. Thank you for your attention. Ladies and gentlemen, I also welcome you to our first press conference. Danielle Nui has just pointed at the regulatory reforms as a source of change for the banking system. Nevertheless, there has been another reform that brought about major change. I'm of course talking about European banking supervision and bringing banking supervision to a European level was just as necessary as regulatory reform. And like regulatory reform, it will help to restore confidence in the banking system. What are the actual benefits of European banking supervision? First, European banking supervision does not stop at national borders but takes a European perspective. And if I may say so, sometimes it's advantageous when you are a little bit more distant in your decision making. It can therefore compare and benchmark banks across borders in order to identify problems early on. Second, European banking supervision combines the experience and the expertise of 19 national supervisors and the ECP can therefore draw on a huge pool of analytical power. Third, European banking supervision can act when action is called for. Ultimately, European banking supervision ensures that banks across the entire euro area are being supervised according to the same high standards within the scope of national legislation. In 2015, we took important steps in that direction. For instance, with regard to our main instrument of banking supervision, the supervisory review and evaluation process or SREP for short. Capital requirements based on a risk-based and forward-looking analysis and embedded in SREP are essential in safeguarding the stability of the financial system. In 2015, the SREP was for the first time ever conducted according to a harmonized methodology. Banks across the euro area were measured against a common yardstick. Consequently, we now observe a stronger correlation between the risk profile of the institutions and the relevant supervisory capital requirements. In 2016, we will further refine the SREP. In that context, we asked for clarification regarding the legal underpinnings of SREP and received the European Commission's internal discussion paper for comments. We welcome the Commission's objective of creating regulatory certainty as this is crucial for both banks and markets. In 2016, the SREP will be supplemented by two stress tests. A EU-wide stress test conducted by the European Banking Authority, the EBA and a EU-wide stress test conducted by the ECB. The SSM will hence be able to assess all significant institutions in the euro area from a forward-looking perspective. For both stress tests, the provisions of the EBA's methodology will be relevant. The insights gained from the EBA and the ECB stress test will feed into the 2016 SREP and it's therefore not a pass-or-fail exercise. Moreover, any data quality and quality assurance issue that come to light during the exercise will also be incorporated in the 2016 SREP for the institution's concern. European regulation offers a large number of provisions which give supervisors some leeway in deciding on their concrete implementation. When we agreed on exercising these options and descriptions in a harmonized manner across the entire euro area in 2015, we took another step towards harmonizing banking supervision. The relevant regulation and a guide will enter into force in October 2016, so this year. To sum up, during the full year of European banking supervision, we have accomplished much towards the harmonization of banking supervision across the euro area, but there's still a lot of work ahead of us. We are, for instance, preparing a targeted review of banks' internal models. The background for our review is that many significant institutions use internal models to determine regulatory capital requirements. Our review seeks to reduce the non-risk-based variability in model-based capital requirements. Ladies and gentlemen, in our statement today, we have so far focused on the significant institution, those banks that are directly supervised by the ECB. However, we must not forget the around 3,200 less significant institutions, or LSIs, called. In many countries, those small and medium-sized banks are highly important for the regional and national economy. And as a group, they can be also relevant for national financial stability. Those banks are directly supervised by the National Competent Authority, and it is not our ambition to change this and directly supervise them. Rather, the SSM exercises oversight over the overall functioning of the system. And together with the National Supervisor, we are developing common supervisory standards, which take into account regional aspects as well as the size, business activities and risk profiles of individual institutions. Accordingly, we have agreed with the National Supervisors on, for instance, a joint standard on supervisory planning for LSIs. This standard enables the National Supervisors to define supervisory priorities for their LSIs according to a common methodology. In the same way, we have recently agreed on a joint supervisory standard on recovery planning for LSIs. And we are looking into institutional protection schemes, which are particularly relevant for less significant institutions. Under European law, banks may be granted certain privileges regarding capital liquidity requirements, regarding large exposure rules, if they belong to a protection scheme. Given our objective of harmonization of level playing field, there is much to be said for granting these privileges in accordance with uniform criteria. We have now defined the relevant criteria and are currently conducting a public consultation that will run until mid-April. In brief, while regulatory reform is coming to an end, we are still refining the methods and processes of supervision. Ultimately, we will have created a strong supervisory framework which contributes to the safety and soundness of the banking system with full regard and duty of care for the unity and integrity of the internal market. Thank you for your attention. Thank you very much. We will come to questions now. Please, Claire Jones. Claire Jones, Financial Times. There's been a lot of criticism from some of the banks that use supervisor of negative interest rates with quite a few senior bankers saying it's forcing them to take on too much risk now. Ms Noy, you mentioned in your opening statement that it's very important that banks can manage their risks appropriately. Does this mean that you agree with banks' concerns that your colleagues on the governing council are pushing banks to take on too much risk and it may be good for you to talk a little bit about whether some of the new measures such as Teltros address some of those risks that you see to bank profitability. I'd also like to ask about sovereign risk rates. Now you've criticised in the past the zero risk rates on sovereign assets. Now the Basel committee is reviewing this. What are you doing to ensure that this committee comes out with what you believe is the right outcome on this issue? Thank you very much for the questions. Indeed, the profitability of the banks is challenged nowadays, but there are two main reasons for that, the level of interest rate for sure, but also the level of non-performing exposures. Such challenging times are also good opportunities for the banks to review their business model, reassess the sustainability of their business models, and I believe they have room for maneuvering. If we look, for example, at cost to income ratios of the European banks, they are pretty high, so they could go down and the banks could be more efficient and some are already working, many are already working on this efficiency. Also digitalisation is a new possibility for the banks. There are many customers that would like to receive banking services through digitalisation and this is also helping to be more efficient to have lower cost to income ratios. So challenges, but also opportunities. Do you want to add something, Sabine, on this? Well, I think banks need to cope with the macroeconomic environment they find. We had several times in the last 50 years in an interest environment where the real interest rate was negative and I do believe that yes, there is a challenge with regard to the low interest rate environment. Do not forget on the other side and you mentioned that already with the TLTRO that there are some gains with regard to the funding cost too. So it is a challenging environment, but it was a challenging environment already before because, and here I totally agree with Danielle, we need to have viable business models in banks which can cope not only with the macroeconomic environment when there is a low interest rate but which can cope with competition from the digitalisation coming with competition from the shadow banking market with regard to the regulatory reforms which put a burden on banks. So there are many, many issues on the table which calls for demanding business models in some of the banks we supervise. So I wouldn't pick out the low interest rate environment in particular. Regarding sovereign risk, let me say that I am happy that this issue is now addressed. It is addressed at international level within the Basel Committee and it is also addressed at the European level where the progress are good. There is also now an hybrid approach which is discussed where the risk weighted asset could be dependent on the concentration and on the quality of the sovereigns. I think good work is being done so something reasonable will come out of this work on discussions. Next question. Thank you. You mentioned the flexibility in terms of interpreting some of the regulations coming from Brussels. At the end of his last news conference, Mr Draghi referenced an internal commission document on how to interpret some of the capital requirements. I guess the question was is there any difference between the SSM and Mr Draghi on how to interpret the pillar two requirements for banks? My second question was in terms of the Greek banking sector, are there any particular changes? What are your priorities there? What are there any particular changes that you're trying to see implemented in the coming year? Thanks. Well, I doubt very much that there are differences between the president and the SSM. Also, I had no chance to discuss it with the president yet because it came late on recently. This clarification from the commission. Let me say first that we ask for this clarification from the commission. Clarification, certainty, harmonization are a very important concept for us. In order to do harmonize the supervision in the SSM and in Europe, we need to have harmonized regulation and the regulation is unclear. So we ask for the clarification. We have received recently this clarification which is welcome and we are working on this document to see our best use this clarification that has come from the commission. I know the word of flexibility to implement the regulation was employed in the report of the ECON Committee on Banking Union. It's not that easy for supervisors to be flexible with law. I would not recommend that supervisors to be flexible with law. We just want to implement the law so I am very happy that clarification, the flexibility is coming from the persons in charge of interpreting the law, namely the commission. That was a second part of the question on the Greek banking sector. I do have a problem to order banks in countries. We have a European perspective here so we are as a banking supervisor looking at banks in a very institution-specific way and each bank has its peculiarities and need to be supervised individually and aligned with its risk profile, its business model. So for me, to say there are the German banks or there are the Dutch ones or there are the Greek ones, I have a problem with this concept. When you talk about the overall status with regard to Ries, I think it is very important that they come out at the right time when the conditions are fulfilled out of their capital control measures, that the banks go into a usual business again with regard to the capital control measures when they are lifted. We did, I think, a great job with regard to the comprehensive assessment, ensuring that the banks have enough capital for the upcoming years in order to cope even with an adverse scenario, an adverse development and I believe with the rest, it is just very, very important that the macroeconomic environment in Ries aligns. The capital control measures are lifted when they are ready and then we will see what happens with the single banks. Would you like to compliment? I fully agree. The Greek banks were hit by something that had nothing to do with their own situation. It was a very violent stress, more violent and brutal than a supervisor's adverse scenario. They went through. Now they are recovering from this episode and I am pretty certain, like Sabine said, that when they are out of exchange control, thanks to the progress of the country, they will be able to do the job of funding the economy that needs it in Greece just like other SSM banks. I have a question up here. I have a general question to both of you basically. The mandate of the ECB is very clear. It says maintaining price stability comes first. The question is, is it fair to assume that banking supervision comes second for the ECB? Shall I start? As I am the master of separation, being in both areas. We do have clear objectives on the central bank side with, as you mentioned, maintaining price stability and totally independent, totally separated from this. There is no hierarchy. There is our objective in the SSM to contribute to a safe and sound banking system, to work for the customers of the banks to ensure that we have a functioning banking system. There is no first and no second as these are separate objectives done by different staff prepared in the decision with a very protecting rule framework around it in the decision making, separated with the information flows and the decision preparing. For me, no first and second, but totally in parallel and in separate objectives which we have to fulfil. In the second floor, then we will take that first. The commission document that you referred to makes a very concrete proposal when it comes to the SREP process. It proposes to split the capital add-on that is decided on the SREP into a mandatory requirement and guidance as they call it. Is that a distinction or a split that would make sense in your SREP methodologies? Is that something you could think of adopting? What are your thoughts about that possible? Which is similar to what the Bank of England is doing. Secondly, you were saying Madam Nui that the rising spreads on some instruments were showing that investors were waking up to the new reality, those are my words now. Are you saying that the developments we saw on the cocoa market in the first two months of the year were actually the same or are they the new norm? There is a link between the two questions as a matter of fact. Yes, the paper from the commission makes a difference between pilot to requirement and pilot to guidance. It may be useful, frankly, to address the problems that raise from the implementation of the directive on CRR, the stacking order of the different buffers and also the point where maximum distribution amount is getting effect. So yes, we think that it may be useful and we will consider how to implement it. This is the kind of work in progress that we are having now regarding the SREP. Indeed, I believe that the investors are gradually taking into consideration the new word, the new post-BRD directive implementation, full implementation, the new bailing world and they don't like uncertainty, the investors on the markets and if they feel that they are in a situation with uncertainty, they hit the banks for that. So that's why we absolutely need to deliver certainty, clarity, transparency to the market on pilot to on the way it is calculated and on the maximum distribution amount. So on these two we have requested the clarification to the commission and I would even go further, I think clarity regarding the maximum distribution amount on top of the clarification already received should be in legislation to provide full clarity on transparency to the markets. So now we had a question in the second row here, up front here please. There was a case in Latvia, if I'm not mistaken, where the ECB ordered the closing of a small bank. I'm not quite sure if this was the first time you took such an enforcement action, but if it was, maybe you could give a little bit of flavor as to how that came about, did the initiative come from the ECB itself or from the national supervisor and if it was not the first time, could you maybe mention the number of similar cases if there had been some in the past and let's say what is the generic type of action that you would take in such cases? We won't comment on single banks as we do have confidentiality rules with regard to the specifics of single banks so we cannot go into the detail of one bank, but I can give you some generic idea. No, it was not the first time that we withdraw a license. And this is exactly the process we have with regard to small banks. The less significant ones, as I mentioned in my introductory statements, are supervised, directly supervised by the national competent authorities, but the question of who gets a license and is a license withdrawn under certain circumstances is something that is answered here and is done here. When do you do this? You do this in general when the national competent authority asks you and applies for withdrawal of the license because the national competent authority as being the one in charge for the less significant ones tells you as ECB, they do not fulfill certain capital requirements, they are other issues which justifies, which makes it necessary to withdraw a license. And that was the case with the bank you were mentioning. It was not the first time that we did this with regard to less significant banks. We had some Italian cases, for example. So this is a way of dealing with small banks who either go into insolvency or where they go via a bridge bank to a new owner. There you have always the question of what do you do with the old license, do you need a new license for the bridge bank, etc. And this is done here with us. So let's move over here, the gentleman in the third row there. Thomas Seidel, Luxembourg Avant. Yesterday the German Finance Minister, Dr. Scheupler, introduced to his audience a kind of regulation for small banks, he called it small banking box. Can you tell us something about details? What is going on in the European Union? How will such a small banking box look like? I'm really sorry. Do you know a little bit more what he meant with a small banking box? Can you give me a little bit more detail and then perhaps with other keywords I can... Yeah, he told in his speech all about regulation and the efforts of the regulation, of the new regulation. And when it comes to the question, what is the burden for smaller banks?  Okay, now I know what you mean, perhaps probably. I'm not in charge of Mr. Scheupler and commenting and interpreting his words. But I can imagine, I assume that it is the ongoing discussion which we had for 20 years now, whether there should be in regulation a difference between the international active banks and the small and medium sized banks which are only regional active and which more or less do not have interconnectedness, cross-border, which do not have investment banking, etc. And it was always discussed in Germany as we have so many small banks, whether it is totally justified to take the same regulation for the small banks than the big ones. And it comes up always with the Basel Committee because the Basel Committee does standards for international active banks. And there are many countries which only take these standards for the big ones, US America, for example. They ask only the big ones to comply with the Basel standards and then they have an own rule set, an own rule box for the small ones. And we are always, when we are on the Basel Committee, we are always discussing then and saying as a European representative, my French, my Dutch, my Italian colleagues and myself, we always ensure that in the Basel Committee the people acknowledge that what we are talking about and what we are proposing as rules is not only valid for the big ones but that has to fit too with a certain kind of proportionality with a certain kind of justification to the small ones too. And it might be that Mr. Scheupler took this up again and asked himself whether there should be a separate, a different rule box for the small ones. If I may add something, I would like to say that I think the best way forward is a single regulation implemented with proportionality and proportionality is a magic word. Proportionality should be always on the magic tool, should be always used. But I doubt personally that to have two sets of rules when the two categories of banks are competing together domestically would do any good to the small bank. They are probably better off being in the same single European regulatory framework but it has to be implemented with proportionality and I am under tough scrutiny from the European Parliament on this. I got the question several times yesterday in the European Parliament.  That is where we have to be convincing. I totally join and I think so too. We discussed this for 20 years in Germany and I think it is very difficult where to put the threshold. When is a bank important enough to justify different rules? And what kind of competition questions do you get in a single market, in a country where the saving banks succeed with the big ones especially in Germany with regard to retail customers, corporate clients, etc. It is a very difficult question to really do two different sets of regulation and yes, proportionality is at the end. What we try to do and I think where we both succeeded because we always said next to each other the Basel Committee for 10 years. France and Germany, exactly. I think where we really succeeded is that we put enough wording and phrasing in the Basel standards that you can apply proportionality and can more or less justify differences. It is a little bit like with the minimum requirements of risk management in Germany where you more or less take stricter standards, much higher standards need to take into account the big ones and the smaller ones are burdened less. But have the framework the same, you know the pillars, the key features are the same. We have a question here in the front and then we'll go to the middle. No, wait, sorry, the gentleman in the front. Thank you. Questions please. In Germany there is not only a strong criticism on the monetary policy stance but also there is a strong resistance again in European guarantee scheme project which would be the third pillar of the banking union. So my question is how optimistic are you that it is possible to circumvent this German opposition to the project and or it is better to leave it for the next future when other conditions maybe are fulfilled. And second questions in the press. There are some reports regarding the so called KUMX dividend schemes, quite complicated issue involving a lot of financial actors, among them possibly banks and your scrutiny. So I wanted to ask do you have an eye on this KUMX topic which is quite a German issue I guess and in more generally, how do you handle with those kinds of legal risks? Is it something that is on your duty? Thank you. I will start with Edith and a couple of general sentences on conduct rates but I will let Sabine comment this KUMX scheme that I know less than her obviously. Well let me say that we welcomed European Commission proposal for deposit guarantee scheme because this third pillar is the missing pillar of the banking union and we need to have it coming gradually. It is important also for us that bank contributions to deposit insurance funds are risk-based compared to all banks in the banking union and not only to national peers. I know that my German colleagues are also quite keen on risk reduction before moving to risk sharing. Personally I believe that risk sharing and risk reduction have to take place in parallel. The appropriate phasing of fully fledged Edith, the European deposit guarantee scheme is necessary to take into account the different starting positions of national deposit guarantee scheme. Such phasing will also allow making further progress to level the playing field in the banking union and to further reduce risk in the banking sector. So again, risk reduction and risk sharing are mutually reinforcing elements to transcend the banking union and they should not be preconditioned. They should move together. Regarding the second part of the question, I understand that this is about conduct risk which is obviously a matter of concern for supervisors and we are making sure that the governance in the banks, the internal control of the bank including the control of conduct risk is appropriate but I will let Sabine be more precise in the response. Well, it's a very German response. We are not in charge of conduct risk. That's about buffins who work. But we have to take up the results of the investigation of the prosecutor, the results of the findings of buffin and have to ask ourselves what kind of impression and what kind of assessment do we then have with regard to governance and risk management and what kind of impact with regard to the capital, with regard to litigation cost will come to the banks out of it. So we are more or less in what I call second layer of work. So first we have to see what comes out of this investigation and then we will act and assess these outcomes. So what do we do now? We observe this closely and comprehensively and then we will see what kind of impacts this has for the banks. But it's not yet our turn. Perhaps next year's annual press conference. We had a question right here in the middle on the third row please. Thank you. Gerardo Graziolla with RadioCore News Agency. Madame Nuyi, assuming that the first merger between two Italian banks will be successful, which is your vision of the Italian banking system in the next three, four years for instance? Well, as Sabine, I don't look at banking systems frankly. I know about a single banking system which is the SSM banking system with different kinds of banks, different kinds of situations. We believe, and this is the objective we have received, the two of us from the parliament that has approved our nomination, the objective of making sure that banks are safer on sound after the crisis that they went through. So we know that a number of developments have to take place. For example, in countries where the banking system is not very concentrated or not enough concentrated, mergers are desirable. This is my understanding of the legal steps that have been taken by the Italian government to make this important reform of the popular banks is to give them more capacity to address the challenges of the current times and also to be able to have such mergers when it is helpful. And indeed Italy is one of the countries where there is room for mergers in order to have more profitable banks, more sustainable business models. So my vision of the SSM banks in the future, let's say for example in two or the whole years when my mandate will end up is to deliver for the SSM and also for the Italian banking system for sure safer on sound banks thanks to the good work that we are doing with our Italian colleagues to reach this objective. And I think it is a very good perspective to look into the medium and into the long term, not only with regard short term crisis management but to have a kind of vision. What does it need to have a safe and sound bank? What does it need to ensure that the wealth of the customers in the SSM, the banks customers in the SSM, you know that this is safe. And here we need to have banks with a viable business model especially when there are big banks with a sound capital basis in order to cope with potential adverse scenario for a longer time period. A question here in the second row, AFP please. Good morning, Benoitoussaint, Agence France-Presse. Two questions for me, one on Italy, quick follow up from the previous question. Some Italian agencies reported yesterday that the ECB gave its green light to the merger between the two banks and some other agencies reported that the ECB asked only for further clarifications. Could you please give us an idea of the state of discussions and how you satisfied with what the banks announced and where do you see still some room for improvement? And a second question on interest rates. Mr. Pret said last week that the interest rates of the ECB could still go lower. I would like to know if you have a better idea now on the threshold on which it would be unbearable for banks even if they adjust their business models and they work on their business models. Regarding the Italian merger, I will not commend the situation regarding individual banks. I will just tell you that mergers are delicate operations for banks. We all know, I am sure, mergers that in the past made in all the countries, not Italian specifically, banks weaker than they were before a merger. So we want to make sure for all mergers that the new entity is strong from the very beginning. In the present case, we are talking about a bank that would be the third Italian bank. So it's quite important and significant to make it successful, to have a successful merger. This being said, I understand also through the Italian newspaper that are speaking a lot about this operation that the conditions that we have put that would have been exactly the same for any bank in any country of the SSM have been understood by the Italian banks and authorities and that they will be complied with. So it seems that quite fast now there will be possible if I am well informed through what I read and I believe I am, the things will move. Let's wait until they really move to declare that. No interest rate? Shella, no problem with regard to the... No, no. Where is the threshold?  I would not... We have the other way around. We are here in the SSM talking about banking supervision and not so much about low interest rate and what kind of monetary policy instruments are there. They can always go lower, but you have to balance between the costs and the benefits of monetary policy measures. Might they be standard monetary policy measures or non-standard monetary policy measures? But this is my personal opinion. One might doubt about the balances if you were to go lower, but as I said, this is my personal opinion and it might not be the opinion of the governing council. So, looking into the cost-benefit analysis, the side effects, the question of what kind of risks do come with what kind of measures is a very important issue. And then, for me, very important is too if the conditions change, if the macroeconomic environment change when growth is coming back in a sufficient manner to go out as fast as possible when the conditions are met is the most important thing. So, you can count on me that I will be the first one asking for an exit when the conditions are changing. There's a question by Yasmin Osman in the back here and then further up. I had two questions to the commission note or proposal to the pillar two requirements. If you use this proposal, so what share of the SREP, surcharge or add-on you impose now would be in the guidance part and what in the requirements part? So, how would the MDA develop if you would follow those proposals? And what value will the guidance part of a SREP add-on have if it doesn't limit banks' ability to pay dividends or bonuses or cocoa bonds? So, isn't it very useless if banks don't have to fulfill it to pay any dividends? Well, very easy to respond to you because this is work in progress. I have no response yet when we have responses, when we have had a chance to discuss it in the supervisory board, we will inform you. Just to add this note, is a working paper which was sent to us because we asked for clarification on the stacking order, etc. as there seems to be different approaches in the European Union, not in the SSM, in the SSM we harmonized over the SREP, but there are different approaches in the European Union, so we asked for it. Now we got a working paper back with the request, please tell us where do you still need for clarification, what is your opinion, etc. And as Daniel said, it's work in progress. We do not have yet a draft answer to this note. I think last week it came last week and we are still making a list of questions, you know, for the commission too. So a little bit too early your question, but a very good one. So the gentleman goes up. Good morning, Lucadavi, for the 74-hour. Two questions about the consolidation process that we hope is going to start. First of all, as far as we understood, the SSM wants to receive a business plan when two different banks are going to merge. Is it possible that the SSM board could give his preliminary approval to the merger before or even without having all details about the business plan that is due to arrive, but just knowing the main details about capital actions or governance. Second question is about the capital actions that apparently you are going to ask to one of these two banks involved in Italy in this possible merger. Do you think that these actions could be considered as a benchmark for the future for next mergers in an SSM framework? Thank you. Well, it's interesting the SSM because the cultural differences are popping up from time to time, coming from my former capacity. The very first thing that banks would put on the table when discussing a merger would be a business plan of the new entity before everything else. But I have been explained by my Italian colleagues that it's not the way it's done in Italy so far and that it comes a bit later. So granted, we took that. The supervisory board asked for a business plan and still wants to receive one, but it's not a precondition for moving forward on the discussions. This is what we are doing. So, yes, probably there will be a response before receiving this business plan regarding capital actions that we are asking from the banks. Again, we are asking to those banks exactly what we would be asking to any other SSM bank in any other countries provided it presents the same size and same risk profile. For example, we don't ask the same thing to a future third bank in the big country that is Italy that we would require from a merger creating the 15th largest bank in Italy. Obviously the bigger the bank, the most important it is for the SSM and for the Italian banking system that was mentioned earlier. So it's case by case basis outcome of the implementation of the same criteria. So that's the situation. We compare the possible future third Italian banking bank with the Italian banks and SSM banks that are in the same situation, but mostly Italian banks. So watching the time we have about time for one more question. Yes, in the back there please. Balash Karani from Reuters. A couple of questions there. What can and should the ECB do to expedite the resolution of NPRs? Madam Nui, you mentioned yesterday that it will take years to get the NPRs to a reasonable level. Could you venture a guess? You know how many years are you talking about? The second question is somewhat theoretical question about settlement of euro derivative trade. Do you think it is appropriate for such trade to be settled outside the European Union? Currently it is settled inside the EU, but should things change? Would it be appropriate to be for settlement outside the EU? Well, regarding non-performing exposures, we have quite diverse situations in Europe. It's not a problem in all countries of the SSM, for example. When we consider the countries that face this issue, there are different situations based on the loans themselves. Are there loans to retailers, mortgages, for example, or are there loans to SMEs or loans to big corporate? Also, differences are what is the situation of the legal and judicial system in the country? How long it takes to repossess collateral when you try to recover the loan? So how long it takes will depend on these circumstances, obviously. But at the end of the day, it's still always the same solutions. First of all, when we have a problem of this magnitude, we need to use all kinds of tools. All the tools that are available and all the good advice that we could receive, for example, to work with the IMF on this issue of non-performing exposure because there is a lot of expertise in the IMF regarding this issue. And also, the situation is always the same because it means to fix objectives to banks to review their portfolios, to sort out the portfolios between the loans that can be restructured and that will become performing again. And the loans that has already been restructured or cannot be restructured and transformed into performing loans have to be considered as default loans. So, obviously, depending on the magnitude of the problem, it may take more years for certain countries. But this being said, let me remind you that this is precisely why we had this asset quality review, a comprehensive assessment in the beginning of the SSM. We used for the first time a single definition of non-performing exposure, which was a big step in the good direction. And we have identified now the non-performing exposures in all countries using the same definition. We have reviewed the valuation of those assets and we have asked for provisions, all the possible accounting provisions. And when the accounting system was not permitting to have such additional provisions, we had asked for prudential provisions. So, we are in good shape on this ground having identified the problem of having a reasonable level of provision to take the needed time to make it a success. Obviously, when the problem is of a little magnitude, it will be fixed fast. When it is bigger, it will take a bit more time. But as I say quite often, when you have a long journey to do, you have to start as early as possible, this is what we have done, and be very committed. And through the working group that we have established shared by an Irish deputy governor, lady deputy governor of the Irish central bank, because we use the best supervisory practices on this country, Ireland has done a good job with the non-performing exposures. We are moving in the right direction with a lot of momentum. I am surprised of what is achieved by the starting of this journey. Oh, the derivative. Do you want to respond? I mean, when you are talking about settlement of derivatives inside or outside of the euro area. European Union, yes. Is there a hint on the discussion of the referendum? Possibly, I thought so without saying. Well, I mean, we have to see what comes out of the referendum on the 23rd of June, and then we will discuss what kind of location policy is needed or not. So this is a question which comes a little bit too early. Okay, thank you very much for coming. We are closing the press conference here. Thank you.


What's up everybody? Jason here for jasperjasecasebrakes.com 2019 20 upper deck in grain hockey 5 box case break picketing number 11 just sold out There you go. This is the inner case break from a fresh master number 12 is on the website to and pretty much in single duty So we can run back Steve gets lost my module a while There you go Boom, let's open up the case the left the right One two three for the left four five six for the right Six one two three four five six This will be for PYT number Like I said, which we couldn't run back tonight not the team that I want to hit a one-on-one for just joking Steve Wong there you go John Gibson, that's my standing me right there, but nice hit though Steve But the duck so the one-on-one John Gibson. You got Drew Doughty That's my brother and Rudolph Belser. I mean you got a signature shot for the Devils Brandon You knock and we got Elvis Merz Lincoln's very nice rookie for the Columbus bluejack It's one of the last few teams taken to And that is bluejackets court, and then we got a Joel Esperance little patch auto number to 65 Dallas Stars and a nice Emile Bonson or Ben Strum sir Three-color patch to 35 our next box at Darcy camper Synthesis Mark Stone to tonight at 299 and Oliver Wall Street rookie signature shots of Carson Coleman Bruins, it's going to Jack Josh Leon Dryshead.  How are you Mr. Hockey? And Felipe Meyers the flyers It's going to chewy. We got a block house rookie signature shots That is Dylan Sakura Reminds me of an update Yeah, it's update from last year's ingrained hockey. I Remember these ones are super super thick Sometimes I think it's fit 180 so But then a slider box actually Yeah, JR. These are really really nice stuff now. Let's run back the next one guys We got Ryan Donato Think another update right 1819. Yep Boston Bruins going to Jack It's been a little while now. I think we got a piece of the stick of Miquel Bakker 58 out of 65 Little remnants auto center is going to nick and we got the wood Carved in time Mario Lemieux. These cars are beautiful.  Do we have another one? Looks like we have another carved in times synthesis of Nikita Kutcher off Nikita Kutcher off Rasmus Sandin Morgan Frost to 249 Fires going to chewy and how about a Quinn Hughes 20 out of 35 rookie signature shots Vancouver Canucks that's going to John JR. There you go, man Nice hit right there. I gotta get some top of us. I'll just leave it right here and Carved in time Gila floor another nice nice carved in time for the Montreal Canadiens and Riffer, there you go. All right last box guys Sveshnika, Chris Chelyos and Kail McCarr Ilya for the Maybelluse 99 Kyle Conner is a good player for the Jets Same draft class as I believe Patrick Lyonay dealing Secor to 65 The two-color patch another update from 1819 The last hit guys is for the Islanders honorary engravings of Brian Trotter out of 100 There you go Islanders one of the last two teams taken Steve There you go, and very nice break guys two carved in times You got a Leon dry side of Quinn Hughes very nice five box case break here The second half is in the store second inner could be some monster sit hiding in there guys I think less than 10 left in the next one So let's get it going Jasky's case breaks.com


QuickBooks Online 2022. Change account categorization to other expense. Get ready because it's go time with QuickBooks Online 2022. Here we are in Albury. Git Ray Guitar's practice file. We set up with a 30-day free trial holding down control. Scrolling up just a bit to get to that one to five percent currently in the home page otherwise known as the get things done page. Business view as compared to the accounting view. If you wanted to change to the accounting view it is something you can do by going to the cog up top and going down to the switch to the accounting view down below. We will be toggling back and forth between the two views either here or by jumping into the sample file which is currently in the accounting view. Let's go back on over and open up a few tabs to put reports in. Go into the tab up top right clicking on it duplicating the tab up top. Go into the tab to the left right clicking on it again duplicating it again and we're going to focus just on the two tabs here because we're really looking in to the profit and loss report noting that if we were to jump on over to the example company as those are thinking the reports would be located on the left hand side in reports. If we go back on over to the business view the reports are located in the business overview area reports on the left hand side closing up the hamburger. I'm going to open up the P and L the profit and loss the income statement because that's where our major focus will be this time. Let's do the range change. This one I'm going to do the year to date 0101222 123122 and run it go to the tab to the right and let's do this again going to the business overview we're in the reports closing up the hamburger. I'm going to open up the profit and loss again this time just looking at the current month going up top to do that ranging of the changing 020122 to let's say 123122 so this is going to be starting out we haven't entered much in the second month of operations yet. What we have entered however is this interest paid item and the gains item down below. Let's go back to the income statement tab on the left hold control scroll up just a bit you'll note that the income line items are up top and then of course we've got cost of goods sold and then the expense items and then down below we have the other income and we could put other expenses down here so this stuff down here is where you want to put items which aren't basically part of kind of like your normal operations that's why we put the gain on the sale down here so that we can have our normal operations net income and use this number as our basic projection to think about into the future now we could also do that we might decide to do that you may not but you might decide to do that with the interest expense or interest paid item because you might be saying hey look that's a financing thing and if I didn't have a financing problem or a need to finance then that wouldn't be part of my normal operations so you could make the argument that I would like to move that down to other expenses so let's chest that out I also want to take a look at the fact that I have this interest paid which I don't think is a really good term for it because it should be interest expense given the fact that it's possible for you to have a crude interest and then you haven't yet paid just like it's possible for you to have rent that has a crude which you have not yet paid but should be recognizing at the point in time it was incurred so I'd like to change the name of that notice when I entered the data into the system I didn't make another account called interest expense resulting in two accounts that are very similar interest paid and interest expense because that invites me in the future to post things to the two accounts and get mixed up between the two of them what I would like to do instead is adjust the account that is currently in place if there's one I can adjust and then and or delete the you know the the account or at least make inactive that account if I'm not using it so I would like to make this then interest paid and I'd also like to move it down here so it's basically at the bottom so I've got my subtotal of net operating income not including the interest item okay so to do that I'm going to go to the tab to the right now this is another area anytime you're working in the chart of accounts in my opinion the the business view is not the is not the view for this this is where I think the business view is way too restrictive at this point of time QuickBooks might change it but the business view or the chart of accounts would be located in the bookkeeping item and let me just show you what I mean by this if I go into the chart of accounts and then I'm going to close up the hamburger and then if I was to go down to like my expense items down below for example and I was going to look up that interest paid interest paid item which is right here and if I wanted to adjust this this item I can go to the drop down I can edit it but instead of giving me that nice edit field to change where I can make changes they've got this quite restricted format where I can't do much of anything changing the categorization or anything like that so at least not as as easily it's kind of an interview type of process so what I'm going to do is I'm going to close this back out and switch to the accounting view by going to the cog up top and say let's go to the accounting view where we got a little bit more capabilities and here we go before you switch to the accounting view you could yell at the business view a little bit and say what in the world are you thinking into it with why can't I do this this is insane and then you know get a get some water little coffee and then switch to the accounting view and then we're going to go back down here and we're going to go we're in the expenses down below expenses so here the here they are now we're going to have possibly a bit of a problem given the fact that the expenses category is they're using as a these other accounts are subcategories so it's going to be a kind of an issue for me to change the type here because I got these other accounts that are linked to it so let's see what it'll tell me when I try to do that these other accounts down below business loan interest credit card interest mortgage interest you might want to break those out separately but again they're just they just kind of threw these accounts in place to have an all-purpose chart of accounts in other words if it was a business you might not have a mortgage interest and the credit card interest and loan interest possibly you would want them in one account so so in any case let's go ahead and first let's say what if I tried to adjust it here by editing we could see the difference in the editing field I could try to change this I could say what if I wanted to change this to other expense putting it at the bottom of the income statement and then amortization so they have it as amortization I would call it other expense or something like that maybe I'll just go with other miscellaneous expense and then interest paid I don't like interest paid I want it to be called interest expense because paid would mean would indicate that I paid it and that's not necessarily the case you don't really need a description here but whatever we'll keep the description doesn't doesn't add too much so we're going to go ahead and save that and see what it says changing the type or detail on the account may affect your accounting reporting and that's okay because we're not deleting the data the data will still be here so I'm going to say okay and it says you cannot change the type and account with sub accounts that's what I would expect to happen so I'm going to go back in and I'm going to go into these sub accounts I got to get rid of these I don't really want these sub accounts they're not really helping me I just got to get them off of the interest paid account so I can then change it so I'm going to go in and say I'm going to make now we have the ability to make them inactive we can't just delete them so I'd like to make them inactive so what we want but before we do that I do still need to make it not a sub account and inactive and then I also might want to change it just to basically change the name just so that if there's any list or something that has it on that if I don't want to use this account that it won't basically show up on a list of an account that I'm going to be using so I got to go into each one of these and say okay I'm going to edit this item and then I want to make sure it's not a sub account so take it out of the sub account so it doesn't mess up my ability to change the sub account and then I might want to change the name to like zzz or something like that so it puts it at the bottom of any list that I might make and I might want to change it to like an other expense so like it'll put it at the bottom of the list so I'm trying to indicate hey I'm not using this account so I'm going to go ahead and save it and I'm going to say there's nothing posted to it so I should be okay to do that because there's nothing posted in it it's not going to cause any change to it and you want to be careful of doing this of course if there was something posted to it simply moving the account won't delete the transaction but uh but um you you want to be but obviously you want to be careful when you're moving the account so I'm going to scroll all the way down it takes me back up to the top every time we do this which is kind of tedious I'm going to do this with these two again I don't need these two accounts so I'm going to edit this one I'm going to make it then I'm going to make it a a it's not a sub account I want to make it not a sub account is the point and then I'm again I'm going to call this a zzzz for zzzz this time and I'm going to make it an other expense to try to put it at the very bottom of the statement so I'm going to save it and close it and then okay let's do it one more time I'm going to go down to that last one it takes me up to the top again which again is kind of tedious it would be nice if QuickBooks kept you where you were at before so you don't have to scroll back down each time but that is what it is so we're going to go down and we're looking for office interest interest paid mortgage interest I don't need that one either so I'm going to go into it and edit it and then I'm going to put this into once again other expenses and like five zzzz so zzzz and then I'm going to save it and say okay for sub accounts I gotta I gotta get rid of the sub account that was the point get rid of the sub account okay and then I'm going to move it all the way down to the I'm going to go all the way down to the bottom to see these three so now they should be located down here and then I'm just going to make these two accounts I'm going to make them inactive so I'm going to hit the drop down I'm going to say make it inactive and say yes and then I'm going to go all the way down to the bottom again and I want to make that other one inactive so it doesn't show up on our list so I'm going to say make it inactive make it inactive yes and then one more time I'm going to go all the way down again make those inactive and if it's inactive it should it doesn't show up on this list but sometimes it still shows up on some of the drop downs and when you're entering data into the system when and that's why I like to make the zzzz thing so it doesn't it doesn't try to confuse you when you're entering data now you could still find those accounts if you were if you wanted to make something inactive and then activate it later you could go then to the include inactive items and then you could see your inactive items down down below once you've added them let's do that again we're going to go to the cog I'm going to say include inactive items and then if I go down to the bottom of this thing I see it's actually on the next item if I go next there's our three deleted items or made inactive items let's go back to the previous I'm going to I'm going to go back to our active items up top by hitting the cog up top I'm going to make them active so or just show the active items close up the cog hold down control scroll up just a bit one two five percent now I can finally go back into my to my interest account scrolling way down again to find it we're in the expenses area so expenses meals and we're looking for interests meals legal interest there it is okay so now I can edit this let's go ahead and edit it and this one I would like to move down into other expense and I'd like to change the name from interest paid to interest expense expense and then I'm going to save that it's going to move this one this one has something recorded in it but it's not going to delete what's recorded it's just going to move it to the other location so I'm going to save it and that should work now let's go and notice in the chart of accounts if you scroll down it's going to it's going to move it down because it's in order by the account type so it's not in the expense category anymore these are all the expense categories it's in the other income and then way down in other expense down here down below now if I go back on over to my income statement this is the year to date income statement and run it holding control scrolling up just a bit we can see now it's in we've got the income line items and the expense line items it's not in the expenses area in anymore but it's down here in the other expenses so we've got the other income and other expenses so we can kind of close these up and I can say okay this is my income from my normal operation or net income from my normal operations then I had my other income which is income that's not part of normal operations the gains in this case and then we have the other expenses which are my financing expenses which aren't really part of my operations but are kind of financing options now notice that these two drop downs are a little tedious you could try to shorten this up by just using other income or other expense which you might want to use other income because that means that the income would be positive and then I could put this up there possibly as a negative amount so it would be other income and expense items would be negative so let's just see that real quick it can make your income statement a little bit a little bit shorter a little bit less long which could be a virtue in terms of the income statement so we're going to go then let's go back in here and let's say if I find that interest I could try to say let's make it an other income line just to see what that would do so I'm going to go into the drop down and say what if I just want to make other income I don't need two other categories down there I'll just put everything into other income it'll show up as a negative let's save it and close it and it's going to give me a warning again I'm going to warn you do it and see what happens we'll see what happens I'm going to do it let's go let's run it hold control scroll up just a bit and then if I go down below now you've got this one category it's a little offnamed because you would you would like it to be called other income slash expense but now you've only got one drop down and then the expenses are showing up as a negative number income as a positive so you still come up to the to the same result on down below seven thousand eighty one eighty five so that you could do that to you that might be a preferred for some people make it a little bit one less subtotal and let's go back up top I'm going to change it back though I'm going to change it back to the other way so let's change it back and go down again this is going to be an other income now so we're in expenses and then we've got the other income and so let's go down to this interest I'm going to change it back to an other expense edit it again and change it to the other expense other expense and then okay it says gives you the the red warning I'm warning you I'm warning you that you do this there will be repercussions that's what the red exclamation means so then if I go back down we got the same the same bottom line number here and then we've got these two categories other income and other expenses so no real change in terms of the overall trial balance hopefully that so we don't really need to take a look at that again it's just it's just a category change just a category change we did this time