(Press release from Icelandic Prime Minister’s office)
The President of Iceland has declined to sign a law authorising a state guarantee for repayment of loans provided by the UK and the Netherlands to the Depositors‘ and Investors‘ Guarantee Fund, intended to cover payment of the minimum deposit guarantees to depositors in the UK and Netherlands branches of the failed Landsbanki Íslands hf. The law was approved by Althing, the Icelandic Parliament, on 30 December 2009. According to the constitution, the President’s decision not to sign the law requires it to be put to general referendum as soon as possible where it needs to be supported by a simple majority of voters in order to remain in force. In the interim, the law enters into force as passed by the Althingi. The Government will now reflect on the decision of the President and review the situation.
Despite the President‘s decision, the government of Iceland remains fully committed to implementing the bilateral loan agreements and thus the state guarantee provided for by the law.
The government views the loan agreements with the UK and the Netherlands as an integral part of Iceland‘s economic programme, as a solution to the uncertainty regarding repayment of deposit insurance required under Icelandic law. It constitutes an important step towards normalizing the external financing of the country. The government’s economic plan, developed in cooperation with the International Monetary Fund and with financing from the IMF and governments of the Nordic countries and Poland, remains in effect.
Economic data indicates that the economy is performing better than previously projected and is already showing signs of recovery from the financial crash of late 2008. “The government is committed to ensuring that Iceland honours its international obligations and continues the important work of regaining forward momentum thus ensuring significant new job creation and renewed economic growth,” Prime Minister Johanna Sigurdardottir said in a statement today.
To understand this statement more debate is more detailed on this subject over here on this thread from earlier today :
http://www.icenews.is/index.php/2010/01/05/icesave-agreement-rejected-by-icelandic-president/
Icelanders are thinking as their country was still in the Golden Age of Cold War, ….
Some journalist should tell them that the Cold War ended in 1989, about 20 years ago…
>Despite the President‘s decision, the government of Iceland remains fully committed to implementing the bilateral loan agreements and thus the state guarantee provided for by the law.
Sure, we believe that you’re committed to it. However, that doesn’t change the fact that not only will the state guarantee be challenged in the courts, but that it will likely be withdrawn when the law is overturned in a couple of months time (the UK & NL have already said that the previous offer of a guarantee until 2024 is not acceptable).
Its not really up to the Icelandic government is it?
Loan decisions have to pass the approval of the President and thence go for a vote by the people.
Fair enough, but why bother with the Icelandic parliament if it can be by passed.
A government that cannot enter into agreements with other governments (or any lending insitute) is powerless.
To Bromley86:
>>>>the UK & NL have already said that the previous offer of a guarantee until 2024 is not acceptable
The 2024 time limit, has never really been the biggest issue for Iceland, and it clearly seems to be for UK/Netherlands. If the other amendments from the laws passed last August 2009 stay in, that would definitely help pacify most of the opposition in Iceland and allow the laws to pass.
I´m so fed up of hearing and reading that the government of Iceland (which will equal the tax payers having to foot the bill) is obligated to pay the Icesave debt. The government of Iceland did NOT create this debt, it was a bunch of greedy baffoons who promised investors/depositors what they couldn´t deliver & like in any business it was upto individuals to take the risk knowing if the bubble were to burst they would lose their cash. Both governments of the Netherlands & Britain had the responsibility to regulate whatever businesses existed/were run in their respective countries therefore Gordon Brown being in charge of finance during the good money making days should have had the sense to review the Icelandic banks running their businesses there and regulate them incase of such economic collupse. They failed to do so therefore they should have themselves to blame and should follow those business individuals who owned and conned people, have their assets frozed and get them to stand trial both in the Netherlands & in Britain. Amazingly these very same individuals are still in business & living in Britain yet the tax payers in Iceland are being told to pay for this mess! Americans have brought charges to many individuals who took part in bringing the banks down, why can´t the Netherlands, Britain & Iceland do the same? Why isn´t the British government also going after the American government & have them pay for what the American businesses contributed towards the financial collupse? Lets not be bullies and force a small nation with a population of 320,000 to pay for what they really had nothing much to do with. The rich and corrupt individuals who caused this should be brought to justice and made to refund the governments what is owed. NOT THE ICELANDIC TAXPAYERS!
Bravo Mr. President! At last a new Robin Hood has stepped forward. What a relief in this age of continuing moneygrabbing by a small minority yet supported by all EU governments.
nk
Netherlands
This is Great News for Democracy.
The people of Iceland will, hopefully, show that a determined People can challenge the Neoliberal Governments of the World.
Icelandic People know that they do not have to kowtow and pay for the Neoliberal policies foisted on them by the US, UK and EU does. Even if the the UK and EU threaten them, I am sure they will tell them to get stuffed.
What a silly amateurism. Ofcourse Iceland has to foot the bill. The whole society profited from the booming period behind us.
Within existing international rules and regulations your (!) Icelandic government had the responsibility to govern also Dutch and UK branches of Icelandic financial institutions. However both these regulatory institutions and large parts of society decided not to be to critical!
So, sorry but either get yourselves a new president or pay the bill.
Rgds from the Netherlands
Tirrah
And no, personally I did not have any money on any of these banks.
Isn’t it amazing in all this mess how nobody is really going after the Icelandic Banksters whose greed and criminal actions caused the collapse of a whole nation? All the pseudo-investigations will lead nowhere, because of the clubby culture of circling the wagons, and at the end it will be the ordinary citizens of Iceland who will suffer, while the Banksters will continue to fly around in their private jets with their trophy wives. The more things change, the more they remain the same…
Iceland’s government may still be committed to debt repayment, but its President and people aren’t. So, what’s the point of Iceland’s government?…
Icesave incident in a nutshell: Iceland nationalize their banks, but guarantee only their domestic depositors. This is in a disguised form stealing money from the pocket of foreign depositors into their own, since all depositors, regardless of foreign or domestic, should have equal rights in these nationalized banks.
A reminder to the Icelanders who don’t feel that the Icelandic taxpayers should pay off the banks debts; you all benefited from the credit driven booming economy prior to October 2008. Of course some of you benefited more than others, but you all did.
The President as Robin Hood? Get real. nk, why don’t you start a fundraiser in the Netherlands to help Iceland.
Unless I am misunderstanding the situation, there appears to be a little revisionism going on here. Landsbanki accepted both domestic and foreign deposits. Those deposits were heavily invested, especially in Icelandic corporations and interests. When Landsbanki failed the government took over the bank, used its assets which were purchased by both foriegn and domestic deposits, and only guaranteed the domestic deposits. While I could certainly understand a system where both deposits suffered equally, Iceland seems to believe the only fair system is one in which the foreign deposits assumed all the risk, while the domestic ones assumed none.
The logic trying to support statements such as West’s is staggering and incorrect.
I understand the emotional response of victims to hold “Iceland” accountable, but the true response is to hold THOSE RESPONSIBLE responsible. Get it?
Every possible parallel and metaphor supports this. If a family benefits over years from what is provided from the father only to one day discover the father was a criminal… does the family now enter workcamps for years to pay back? Or is restitution and justice sought with the guilty party?
I could go on and on but it is often impossible to try and reason an emotional argument with logic. And certainly, both sides are emotional. But if both sides fought hard to bring the responsible parties to justice I think there might be more catharsis than the unproductive nitpicking and bullying that is going on currently.
I am a UK citizen and live in the UK. I am ashamed of my government. They are acting like bullies–plain and simple. If Iceland was anything but a tiny nation, the UK government would be more flexible. I think the UK government is acting disgracefully towards Iceland.
Landsbanki assets will cover 80% of what is needed for icesave deposits, the Icelandic state will pay the rest,
the problem is that UK/NL dont want money, they want the country, thats why they have presented to us a deal that will ruin us, the colllateral is the country and all foreign and domestic assets,
Olafur was right to refuse to sign this contract
no matter what the consequences will be.
>I understand the emotional response of victims to hold “Iceland” accountable, but the true response is to hold THOSE RESPONSIBLE responsible. Get it?
Unfortunately Iceland is not a part of the One World Government. As an independent and sovereign nation, they are responsible for enforcing their own laws and regulations. So yes, at that level, it’s off to the workcamps for everyone even though the father is responsible.
So they pay the UK/NL what is owed and they chase and prosecute their criminals. As the meerkat says, “Simples”.
@ Ryan,
It is logically possible to think otherwise.
It’s not unheard of for citizens of a country to be held collectively responsible for the actions of their government.
Concerning your criminal father (and “every possible parallel and metaphor”) example, consider the principle of unjust enrichment; where one party is unjustly enriched at the expense of another, and has an obligation to make restitution, regardless of liability.
Ask Bernie Madoff’s wife about other possible permutations, like “clawbacks”.
I know it is painful, but Iceland is responsible for those debts.
Dutch and British investors deposited money in Icelandic banks which were guaranteed by the Icelandic government. When those banks went bust it was the obligation of the Icelandic government to stand by those guarantees.
Sorry, but emotional hype and Anti British insults don’t change the facts of the situation.
@ C H Ingoldby: how were those debts guaranteed by the Icelandic government?
Ryan, your comments are not related to what I said, but here is your answer: “Fitch lowers Iceland credit rating to junk”. Nobody is going to lend money to Iceland or to Icelandic companies unless the interest is very high. The President originally wanted to borrow money from Russia, so let him.
Congratulations to you all as a people and for the president as a courageous person, for turning down what can only be defined as a blackmail actio. From the UK & Dutch governments.
Just 5 minutes ago Mr. Bos, Dutch minister of finance, stated that it is unacceptable to have Dutch tax payers foot the bill for compensating the Icesave deposit holders.
If that is so, how can he expect the people from Iceland to accept what he himself finds unacceptable??? To then twist the truth by saying “the loan from Holland to Iceland should be repaid” is straight out of the 3rd Reich where Mr. Göbels showed similar mastery in twisting the truth to suit his abject mind. What loan is he talking about??? Or is he referring to his own premature reimbursement of Dutch deposit holders who themselves followed the money driven by so much greedy incompetence that they failed to see the risks…
Furthermore, the Dutch government is only too able to block international actvities such as online gambling, claiming it to be illegal only because they lose out in tax revenues. Holland has the Nederlandse Bank, regulatory institutes and numerous other checks and balances to monitor dubious banks and other financial institutions, as does the UK. Where were they in halting Icesave from operating in Holland?
I once again congratulate all you Icelanders with this just course of events. Stay the course and do not give in to scheming, truth bending, dictatorial blackmail from either Holland or the UK.
With kind regards,
Fried-Jan Unger
Arnhem
The Netherlands
fju0761@gmail.com
I think the people of Iceland are being ill-served by their so-called leaders. The fact is Iceland owes the money and is going to have to pay up. Their leaders should really be spelling out the long-term facts of economic life. If they don’t pay up in accordance with the agreed terms, and everyone postures madly saying that these debts will not be repaid all confidence in the country will disappear. Then there will be very much more serious and long-term repurcussions for the Icelandic people as they find it difficult to trade or recover from their difficult economic position.
Yes, Iceland is a democracy, but so are the UK and the Netherlands. Do people in Iceland not understand that thier President having made such a fiasco out of this, the UK and Dutch governments are going to have real pressure on them now to take far less flexible actions and to be seen to protect their national interests?
People should be happy and celebrateing this day, but be ready because now comes the full force of the media and the goberment trying to scare the country into voting YES, when they put it to national vote. By that time people will be so scared that they will want to vote yes,(spect the krona going down, and gasoline going up and inflation, and news about how many countries dont like us anymore buaaah, buaaah), but this is the time to show unity and b@lls, it doesnt matter if iceland signs this contract or the one last august or any other, Iceland is going down the drain anyways, but I rather fall knowing that I´m free to get up if I have any chance, than fall knowing that somebody will hold me down whenever I try to get up, and accepting this contract means that, not standing up ever again, signing this contract is not about Iceland falling further down or not, Iceland IS going to fall further down, this contract is about not beeing able to stand up ever again. There is no foring investment coming to Iceland, it doesnt matter if we sign or not, as I read somewhere, the only thing is that if we sign this deal, the forign creditors will accept our resources and companies as part payment, and then goberment with the help of the media will sell the headline: “forign investors willing to invest in Iceland” when in fact they will only be giving our resources and companies away, whis is exactly what IMF and UK want. so be ready and dont let the media scare you.
Fortunately, Iceland is a part of the “One World Government”. More exactly – Europe, EFTA etc. and is acting withing its legal framework.
Iceland is supposed to enforce the laws over its banks. That’s correct. And simple. But as soon as UK and NL states stepped in to the process of regulating Icelandic banks – the case is no longer that “simple” as you want to show it ;-)
I also doubt you can argue with that basic principle of democracy
“It has steadily become more apparent that the people must be convinced that they themselves determine the future course. The involvement of the whole nation in the final decision is therefore the
prerequisite for a successful solution, reconciliation and recovery.
Now the people have the power and the responsibility in their hands.”
For those who doesn’t read originals – this is a quote from the President’s Declaration.
From two of your phrases I came to the conclusion that it is you, C H Ingoldby, who didn’t know facts.
It’s either deposits or investments but never both etc.
And you can say “anti-british insults” only if you are member of UK government cause there is no anti-british sentiments among Icelanders. But as you know – government and people are not same things.
What loan? British and dutch citizens invested in Icesave, like some people did in Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi-scheme in New York. The american government didn’t pay the losses of those investors, so why should british and dutch government give the Icesave investors their money back? And if they did, why should the icelandic people suffer for this? Everyone should know that if the interest rate is high, it is only because the risk is high. It is allowed to be stupid, but you should suffer yourself for your stupidity!
Axel:
“he problem is that UK/NL dont want money, they want the country, thats why they have presented to us a deal that will ruin us, the collateral is the country and all foreign and domestic assets,”
I can understand why you would think that, after all your people were feted as ‘Vikings’ borrowing money overseas to buy overseas assets (mainly in the UK). With that admiration of raping thieves its logical to think that other countries have the same mindset. We don’t, we just want our money back (not even all of it).
@Norwegian
very nice comment, except that it is incorrect. We’re not talking about UK/Dutch investors. We’re talking about people putting their savings into an Icelandic bank account. An Icelandic bank account which falls under the Icelandic government guarantee scheme.
Let me give you an analogy.
My son asks to borrow 100 dollars from you. You are hesitant to lend him the money, but then I step in and say, ‘don’t worry, if my son can’t pay you back, I promise I will’. Then suddenly my son can’t pay you back, and you come to me for the money and then I say:”Sorry, my son is 21, he is not my responsibility anymore and you were a fool to lend him money’. At the same time, my daughter also comes to me, because she also lent 100 dollars to my son. And then I say, don’t worry child, I promised I would take care of any debts of my son, of course I will reimburse you.
Do you think that would be a fair situation?
> We don’t, we just want our money back
May I ask why, if you so much want your $$$ back, your govt declined previous version of the bill (Sep 2009)?
Yes, in case of long lasting economical disaster you wouldn’t get everything but most part of it.
If you so much want your money back, why are UK and NL trying to make an additional $$$ on IS trouble pushing a ‘deal’ under almost 6% of interest?
No, it seem what you don’t want your money back. Then what do you want?
@Leo
That was quite a stupid analogy, because nobody asked for a loan, the depositors came willingly to put momey into a high interest rate account, which means high risk.
Check this surveys:
http://mbl.is/mm/frettir/innlent/2010/01/06/eiga_islendingar_ad_greida/
@Leo: Nice example. But the Iceland government and the Icelanders in general do not refuse to pay back, It’s the terms that are unacceptable.
TWR:
“May I ask why, if you so much want your $$$ back, your govt declined previous version of the bill (Sep 2009)?”
Becuase you don’t haggle with a guarantee, you pay your debts in full. The reason the EU countries can do this is because Iceland will pay the many back, fair means or foul. The 5.5% rate is hardly penal, its far less than the Icelandic base rate, below the state bond rate 8%, only a little over the CDS insurance rate (4.25% at present) which is added to the interest rate and the same as your good friend the Faroe Islands lent money.
The reason for Icelanders complaining about this bill is because they think they can haggle a better deal by defrauding UK and Dutch tax payers.
Its like thieves haggling over what property they will return after being caught. Despicable.
@Easy
Yes, the Icelandic bank did ask for the money. Its why they pay the high interest.
If you go around yelling: I will give you 5.25% interest if you put your money in my bank!, then guess what, you are asking for a loan.
@Petros
and what terms are unacceptable?
They don’t have to start repaying for the first 7 years. That seems very generous.
The interest rate on the loan is 5.5%, while if Iceland borrows on the financial markets, it has to pay 8% interest.
What is the problem with the loan? It is more generous than anything Iceland could ever get on the financial markets.
It is a complicated issue, and I am not sure which side I sympathise with the most.
However – people should remember the difference between ‘investments’ and ’savings’.
If I invest into a company, and things go wrong, then tough luck on me. It was the risk I knowingly agreed to take, in return for potential high returns.
If I choose to save my money in any bank, I will expect to be able to withdraw it at any time I like – especially if my deposit has been guaranteed by the government of a respectable nation – this is the agreement of trust that the concept of banking relies on.
Two separate things entirely.
However, I can see why the Icelandic people are so angry. It is the wrong group of people being made to pay for other peoples’ crimes (yes, crimes), and the normal hardworking people in Britain are being made to pay just like they are in Iceland.
It would be a shame for this problem to degenerate into childish nationalistic name-calling and goading from the general public(which I have already seen from both sides) when really it is the amazingly short-sighted and self serving policies of our respective governments to blame.
Hmmm, still don’t know what I would do about it, though :-/
Those who put their savings in Bernard Madoff’s funds had even more reason to trust him. He was american, vell reputatet over a long periode, and he was even jewish. When you move your money from a bank you know to a bank just established, owned by foreigners, and with interest rates far above what you can get in any other bank, you should at least check if the bank is a member of your national bank security funding system. And if it is, you should not exceed your national guarantee limit. This we knew in Norway. Maybe this is a lesson we learned when we had a bank crise some years ago. Icesave had 425000 depositors in Holland and UK. The total number of taxpayers in Iceland is approximately half of this. So to pay the losses, without interest, will cost the average icelandic taxpayer twice as much as the average loss!
“What loan? British and dutch citizens invested in Icesave, like some people did in Bernard Madoff’s Ponzi-scheme in New York”
They were depositing money in a bank chartered by the Icelandic government. The depositors had no way of knowing that the Icelandic banking system was a Ponzi scheme.
To Leo:
>>>and what terms are unacceptable? They don’t have to start repaying for the first 7 years. That seems very generous. The interest rate on the loan is 5.5%, while if Iceland borrows on the financial markets, it has to pay 8% interest. What is the problem with the loan? It is more generous than anything Iceland could ever get on the financial markets.
The issue is not whether YOU think it is generous, it is whether the Icesave agreement is acceptable to the Icelandic population. That is what the referendum will decide democratically. Until a fair and equitable agreement to ALL parties can be reached you will always have fierce opposition to it here in Iceland.
1. Iceland warned the Brits for Landskibank and Icesafe that it was a private bank and that Iceland was not in a position to cover it’s potential losses.
2. The British authorities did not undertake anything to check or supervise.
3. When Landskibank collapsed, the Brits confiscated foreign Icelandic assets and used their terror laws to blacklist Iceland.
This was an evil deed and it caused great harm to the entire economy of Iceland.
4. How far can a Government go in support of financial institutions diverting all the risks to the taxpayer?
5. The President of iceland has a case here.
The amount of debt is too high for Icelands small population.
6. Stay away from the EU.
It will cost Iceland it’s sovereignty.
7. Stay independent like Switzerland and develop your geothermal energy technology for export to countries like Panama who are now screwing around with useless wind mills.
8. Stay far away from the EU apparatchiks (Kommisars) with their socialists plans and crazy Wolrd Government aspirations.
9. Be a free and proud people and never allow your country and your freedom taken away from you by a bunch of burocrat rats who totally lost it.
The EU is a rat hole.
@Bjarni
No, this is not about what is acceptable to the Icelandic population. It is about what is acceptable to Iceland, the UK and Holland.
And failure to come to an agreement quickly only hurts Iceland really.
You are running out of money, your country is getting downgraded in the financial markets, which means you pay more interest on any new loans you take out and you won’t get IMF support, Nordic support or EU-membership until you accept the responsibility to pay this money with conditions that are acceptable also to the UK and Holland.
Those who put their savings in Bernard Madoff’s funds didn’t know it was a Ponzi-scheme either. And if the governments in UK and Holland were sure about their claims, why was Iceland denied to bring the case to court? The fact is that EU liberalized the banking system, but started to make a better bank security funding system AFTER the Icesave bankruptcy. Even with this new system, EU will have a much lower guarantee limit than what we have in Norway. And the bank control authorities in Holland and UK, what did they do? Nothing, I suppose! They should know what Adam Smith said long ago; that a free marked must be controlled.
”Alexander E. said:
From two of your phrases I came to the conclusion that it is you, C H Ingoldby, who didn’t know facts.
It’s either deposits or investments but never both etc.
And you can say “anti-british insults” only if you are member of UK government cause there is no anti-british sentiments among Icelanders. But as you know – government and people are not same things.”
Alexander E, your stupid pedantry aside, the fact is, the deposits made by British and Dutch investors (and investor does not necesarily mean a stockholder, it can refer to someone who deposits money in a bank) were guaranteed by the Icelandic government.
Therefore the Icelandic government has a responsibility to make good all the losses. With hindsight, the Icelandic government should have been much more careful about regulating those banks.
Iceland mucked up and now Iceland has to pay up. It’s the only moral and legal response.
As for the Anti British sentiments, maybe you are selectively blind? I’ve seen quite a few anti British slurs and to try and wiggle out of it by saying that ‘of course’ those just refer to the British government and not the British people is just dishonest sophisty.
”On Jan 6, 2010, Milena said:
@ C H Ingoldby: how were those debts guaranteed by the Icelandic government?”
The depositor insurance scheme.
The Icelandic government made public, legal commitments that all deposits in Icelandic banks were safe because they were guaranteed by themselves.
Now the banks have gone bust they have to honour that guarantee. It’s painful, but they should have thought about that before making the guarantee and then failing to supervise or regulate their banks.
To Leo:
>>>>No, this is not about what is acceptable to the Icelandic population. It is about what is acceptable to Iceland, the UK and Holland.
I am not sure if you actually read the rest of my comment:
>>>>Until a fair and equitable agreement to ALL parties can be reached you will always have fierce opposition to it here in Iceland.
When I said ALL parties, it should be clear this of course meant all countries, including Iceland, UK and Holland.
This national referendum, is actually the FIRST TIME the Icelandic population gets to have their own say in this matter, not what others have decided or demanded from them.
No matter what the outcome will be in the referendum (the result might actually end up being much closer to 50/50 than most people now realize), having it is the only way the final result will be accepted by the population.
If you read the actual statement by the President:
http://www.forseti.is/media/PDF/10_01_05_declaration_w_sign.pdf
it contains the following:
“It has steadily become more apparent that the people must be convinced that they themselves determine the future course. The involvement of the whole nation in the final decision is therefore the prerequisite for a successful solution, reconciliation and recovery.”
and
“Now the people have the power and the responsibility in their hands. It is my sincere hope that this decision will lead to permanent reconciliation and prosperity for the people of Iceland, at the same time laying the foundations for good relations with all other nations.”
No matter what the what the outcome of the referendum, Iceland faces difficult road ahead with many danger and pitfalls. If things go wrong and we suffer a full-blown sovereign default, at least it will be because of decision we made ourselves, not someone else.
“n Jan 6, 2010, Norwegian said:
Those who put their savings in Bernard Madoff’s funds didn’t know it was a Ponzi-scheme either.”
Madoff was not a bank and never claimed to be a bank. IceSave was a bank chartered by the Icelandic government and “the savings of Iceland’s own citizens were protected from the collapse of its banking sector in October 2008 by an unlimited domestic deposit guarantee.”
@ Leo :
On Jan 6, 2010, Leo said:
@Petros
and what terms are unacceptable?
They don’t have to start repaying for the first 7 years. That seems very generous.
- it is extremely hard for us. They are raising taxes, and at the same time lowering our salaries, we will be struggling to survive whereas the shops are also raising the prices on their products. This is a circle that we have to get out of. If the nation accepts this agreement, we are screwed, or well at least a lot of people will be. And I’m sure that you wouldnt want to live on rice and water and a little bread like some families might have to do, it will become like in the world war.
Why not give us more time to build up our economy and IF we manage to build it up before that deadline, we’ll start repaying you earlier. But I still don’t understand why WE, the nation, have to pay for something that a few individuals are responsible for. Why do the people of Iceland have to suffer whilst the few individuals who are responsible are living happily in the UK for example. While our governments has been trying to find a solution these men have managed to safe their own arses and move away so they wont go out of this as badly as the rest of us.
I really hope we can work this out soon, but with ALL parties interests in mind. Come on, we live on the 21st century nobody wants to go back to “the olden days”