Thread by @jeuasommenulle

The Bloomberg draft transcript of yesterday's epic Monte dei Paschi call is a pure gem.

It literally starts with:

“(Starts Abruptly)”

And then it only goes downhill. A thread and travel in the absurd.

What about helping clients during Covid?

Sure Monte does great. I'd even say that:

“our support to (Technical Difficulty) rates has been continuous and effective”

But more importantly, will they be able to close the NPL sale transaction?

The answer is very clear:

“with this deal, there is profile of the bank and will strongly improved allowing [ph]Gazit to achieve.”

okaaaay

Let's move on to costs, maybe easier? So what's happening with staff? Are you reducing headcounts?

Again, very clear answer.

” With the impact of the -- exit over 500 insisting employees just for basically.”

I’m not sure they’re insisting to stay in that bank

Maybe you’d like to know how asset quality and cost of risk are doing? Here, you’re welcome, no need to thank me.
“At the moment the bid for right in the danger rate are basically in line with Q2 also thanks to the tax of government to support the measures”
Glad the taxman helped

What about the payment holidays? Everything ok there? Now that's an important topic!

Well, I’ve read this 20 times and still can’t tell what it means.

But on the good side, loan volumes are doing fine. Or are they?

"Almost 1% more than the same period of last year, despite the three muscles down and importantly a 40% quarterly increase"

They certainly flexed their muscles there!

Moving back to important topics, has the ECB approved the NPL transfer deal? All conditions are met?

So, does anyone know why Monte is planning to send investors in Frankfurt? That's odd

I’m also very happy to hear that they sold a basket in Belgium. Was it a basket of eggs or financial indices, I’m not sure.

“In particular, the sale of Monte basket Belgium”

The most important part of the results was the massive legal provision. Why did they take it? Apparently, it was all an insect’s fault.

“Beatle caught by surprise by recent events and that's why we had to book these additional provision”

Then a poor Goldman Sachs analyst asked something about SREP and moratorium. Very clear answer there:

"Thank you, sir. The $9 million was not super”

Sorry, what?

Then, an Unidentified Participant asked an unidentified question.

It made sense that he got, from an unidentified speaker, what we can reasonably call an unidentified answer.

Let me repeat this. There might be an impact on an impact, but it depends on what is happening. Someone else. Sure.

A nice guy from KBW then asks about AT1 issuance. But there is some kind of hydraulic problem stopping the deal, apparently.

"But on the H1 issuance we as part of the hydrous infection we have carved out close to more than [ph]$1 billion in net equity”. "

Then Corinne drops the B word and asks about state aid. Oooh, that’s not very nice. But the management is perfectly relaxed.

“I understand why you ask the question, obviously, it's a very delicate question. So we would prefer not to answer any stage”

Why don’t they answer? Simple, they are not on the same planet!

“Which is why we are (inaudible) we are reviewing our capital planet (inaudible)”

But seriously, is my Tier 2 going to be bailed-in ? please tell me! I WANT TO KNOW. A fascinating dialogue ensues

“(inaudible)"
"I think the 9 that then I think.”
"“Sorry, could you repeat, please."

Then BTIG asks a question about SREP. Or is it about SREP?

“about your threat in 2021"
"there was press speculation that you would breach your scrap"

Honestly, I think both threat and scrap work better than SREP here.

That's all, folks, I hope you enjoyed this little journey in the absurd. All quotes are 100% what's in the transcript!