The Insider Picks team writes about stuff we think you'll like. Business Insider has affiliate partnerships, so we get a share of the revenue from your purchase.

• The Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite Mastercard is currently offering 60,000 points after you use your card for $5,000 in purchases within three months of account opening. Those 60,000 points are worth $600 in travel.
• This card doles out 2x points for everything you buy with no bonus categories or limits.
• You will have to pay an $89 annual fee after the first year, but the $600 first-year travel credit more than makes up for it.

As a credit card rewards enthusiast, I have a penchant for new credit cards and their epic sign-up bonuses. As a result, I typically sign up for a few new cards per year then cancel the ones I don't absolutely love when the annual fee posts the second year.

When I signed up for the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite MasterCard a few years ago, I had a similar strategy in mind: Sign up for the card, spend enough to meet the minimum spending requirement so I could earn the sign-up bonus, then cancel the card after 12 months. The thing is, I still have the card and have happily paid the annual fee the past two years. Here's why:

You earn a flat 2x points for each dollar you spend

Right now, the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite Mastercard is offering an amazing 60,000 points after you sign up and use your card for $5,000 in expenses within three months of account opening. However, that only benefits you the first year, which is why it's also worth mentioning that this card offers 2x points for each dollar you spend.

I love earning 2x points on everything I buy with the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite Mastercard since it's streamlined and easy to keep track of. I don't have to worry about special "bonus" categories, nor do I have to keep track of earning limits.

I always have "extra" travel expenses to cover

When you go to redeem points with the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite Mastercard, the process is foolproof and easy. Simply "cash in" your points for statement credits that cover travel expenses that cost over $100 (or 10,000 points) like airfare, hotels, and train travel at a rate of one cent per point. Also note that you get 5% of your miles back automatically every time you go to redeem.

I love this type of flexible travel credit because it's so easy to use for miscellaneous travel expenses you can't cover with hotel points or airline miles. I frequently use Barclays points to cover train fare and I have also used them to pay for cruises in the past.

You can use the points you accrue with this card in a nearly unlimited number of ways. According to the bank, travel expenses that work with this credit include: airlines, hotels, motels, timeshares, campgrounds, car rental agencies, cruise lines, purchase and travel agencies, discount travel sites, trains, buses, taxis, limousines, ferries, and the account annual fee as defined by the merchant category code.

I love booking rental condos

While I belong to several hotel loyalty programs and have a stash of points with each, I really prefer to book rental condos when I can — especially when I travel with my kids. Not only do rental condos give us more space to spread out, but they also afford us a kitchen to cook in and separate bedrooms so we can actually get some sleep.

Fortunately, miles you earn with the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite MasterCard can be redeemed for rental condos through websites like Airbnb.com and VRBO.com.

You don't have to deal with complicated rewards schemes

While I'm a huge fan of airline loyalty programs, their archaic and ever-changing rules can make redeeming points and miles you earn almost impossible. These programs are known for making award availability scarce, and the fact their rules change all the time makes it difficult to anticipate how much a redemption will cost in the future.

With the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite MasterCard, on the other hand, your points are worth one cent each for travel. You won't have to worry about loyalty rules, availability, or blackout dates, either.

Miles never expire

One really annoying aspect of hotel and airline loyalty programs is that, if you don't earn or burn your points fast enough, they can expire. It usually takes 12 to 24 months for this to happen depending on the program, but it's still a hassle to have to keep up with this detail.

With the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite Mastercard, on the other hand, your miles never expire provided your account is open. This helps you avoid having to keep track of expiration policies while making it easy to keep racking up miles for a big redemption.  

No foreign transaction fees

The Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite Mastercard also comes with no foreign transaction fees. For that reason, this is one of the cards I like to carry during our travel overseas. I don't like the idea of paying an extra charge for overseas purchases, so this card lets me shop safely with overseas vendors without paying any extra fees for the privilege.

The bottom line

It would be very remiss of me not to at least mention the Chase Sapphire Preferred Card, which offers a similar annual fee, sign-up bonus, and benefits, and earns transferrable points. You can learn more about this card here.

That said, if you're looking for a rewards credit card that makes redeeming points for travel easy, don't forget to check out the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite Mastercard.

This card's current offer is stunning — 60,000 points after you sign up and use your card for $5,000 in purchases within three months of account opening. You will have to pay an $89 annual fee after the first year, but the $600 first-year travel credit more than makes up for it.

The fact you earn 2x points for every dollar you spend makes it easier than ever to rack up flexible travel credit quickly as well. And let's not forget that you can redeem points for nearly any travel expense you want including airfare, hotels, trains, rental cars, and even campgrounds.

The whole scheme is incredibly simple, which is why I keep using this card for many of my regular expenses. With 2x points on every purchase and an endless number of ways to redeem, the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite MasterCard is definitely a keeper.  

Click here to learn more about the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite Mastercard.

SEE ALSO: Premium hotel credit card face-off: Hilton Aspire vs. SPG Luxury — the winner is blatantly obvious to us

Join the conversation about this story »

The Insider Picks team writes about stuff we think you'll like. Business Insider has affiliate partnerships, so we get a share of the revenue from your purchase.

• Earlier this year, Barclays announced a new, all-time highest sign-up bonus on one of its most popular credit cards, the Barclaycard Arrival Plus World Elite Mastercard.
• Now, Barclays is waiving the annual fee for the first year, making this excellent card even more appealing.
• The sign-up bonus — 60,000 miles when you spend $5,000 in the first 90 days of having the card — is worth more than $600 toward travel expenses. Plus, teh card earns 2x miles on every dollar spent.

Earlier this year, the Barclays closed new applications for its popular Barclaycard Arrival Plus card, before relaunching it with its highest-ever sign-up bonus.

Now, there's something else to make the Arrival Plus a tempting option for anyone looking for a new credit card. The card's $89 annual fee is now waived for the first year — something that wasn't the case before — bringing it in line with other cards in the same price and benefits bracket.

The sign-up bonus — 60,000 miles after spending at least $5,000 within the first 90 days of card membership — can be earned without having to pay a first year's annual fee. That sign-up bonus is best-in-market for personal cards that earn general-use miles, according to a Barclays executive who spoke on background when the card was relaunched.  

SEE ALSO: The best credit card rewards, bonuses, and perks

DON'T MISS: 6 reasons I still use my Barclaycard Arrival Plus 2 years after opening it

Join the conversation about this story »

• In discussions about Disney's streaming future, its over-the-top service ESPN+ has been largely overlooked.
• But Barclays analysts say ESPN+ represents a huge opportunity for Disney in dominating the new landscape of sports digital media.
• To take advantage of this, ESPN+ will have to fundamentally change its business and become not only a curator, but also an aggregator of sports events that other companies have the rights to.

The media behemoths are making bets that direct-to-consumer streaming services (like Netflix) will rule the future, and none has made a more drastic swing in this direction than Disney.

In the not-so-distant future, Disney will control at least three major streaming services: An upcoming Disney-branded service (with content from franchises like Star Wars, Marvel, and Pixar), Hulu, and ESPN+.

Because Disney’s battle against Netflix has been the subject of much of the streaming discussion, ESPN+ has fallen by the wayside a bit.

But in a research note distributed Friday, analysts at Barclays led by Kannan Venkateshwar outlined a huge opportunity the service presents for Disney.

“As we had highlighted many times in the past, we believe in an OTT world, achieving subscriber scale depends on the ability to serve as an aggregation platform to ease access and discovery,” Barclays wrote. “In this respect, we believe ESPN is in a unique position given that it is one of the only scaled media properties where the brand is synonymous with sports. This in effect makes ESPN+ one of the only services that can act as an aggregator for sports.”

Barclays thinks "aggregators"— or platforms that tie together tons of content, and pair it with navigation tools — will rule the over-the-top media landscape, and ESPN is one of the only brands that could step into that role for sports. But to become an aggregator of sports, ESPN has to drastically shift the business.

Right now, ESPN+ is essentially an add-on product that gives people access to sporting events that ESPN has the rights to broadcast, but isn’t running on its main channels. That means it has mostly sports like hockey, soccer, swimming, and so on. Even so, it has performed beyond Wall Street expectations so far, snagging over one million subscribers as of September (at $4.99 per month each), five months after launch.

But Barclays sees the potential for ESPN+ to be much more than an add-on service that brings in a little money. Barclays thinks it could make a play to become a main aggregator for sports in the digital TV world.

“However, in order to get to this end state, ESPN+ will have to morph its business model away from curation more towards aggregation and develop a technology stack and skill sets that are directed at this goal,” Barclays wrote.

It added:

“What this means is that in theory, consumers should be able to get sports through ESPN+ even if Disney does not have the rights to the games through plug-ins such as CBS All Access, MLB.TV, MLS Live, eSports events or any other venue with sports. This can be tiered from a pricing perspective with a base $4.99/month price for seasonal or small scale or regional events with up sells based on experience or access to various sports (for instance, a tier for football or basketball or Martial Arts).”

And if ESPN+ can get scale early, by binding together sports content and serving it up to the consumer, the analysts think that “could be a self-sustaining force, contingent of course on execution, as has been the case with Netflix thus far.” Once it gets going, who is going to stop that train? 

There are many would-be aggregators trying to dominate the future of digital media, but the good news for ESPN is that not many sports media companies have the name recognition, the backing of a giant like Disney, and the encouraging first signs in streaming adoption that it has.

If aggregators do indeed win the day, as Barclays suggests, ESPN is well-positioned for victory. But it needs to make the first moves now.

SEE ALSO: Wall Street analysts broke down the horrible math of the digital TV business, and it could have brutal consequences for some networks

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How 'The Price Is Right' is made

• Barclays analysts think Disney has the assets to deliver a successful streaming service, but it's not a guarantee.
• The analysts see a number of potential hurdles Disney could face as it launches the service next year that could be issues for investors.
• Along with the new service, Disney will also be involved with ESPN+ and Hulu, which analysts see as "reductive" until Disney figures out pricing and bundling strategies. 
• Analysts also see Disney's licensing agreements as a possible problem, as the new service will likely not have Disney's full library of content at launch, particularly old "Star Wars" movies.
• On top of all of this, Disney will be launching its service during a "complex integration" after the Disney-Fox deal closes.

Disney is expected to roll out its own streaming service late next year to compete, primarily, with Netflix. With so much content at its disposal — Marvel, Star Wars, Pixar, and Fox properties — it's bound to be a popular service.

But in a new report distributed Friday, Barclays analysts said those assets don't guarantee a home run.

When Disney launches its streaming service, it will likely be one of three video services Disney is involved with, along with ESPN+ and Hulu. Both Fox and Disney own 30% of Hulu, which means Disney will double its stake in the service once its merger with Fox is complete.

Barclays sees these offerings as "reductive."

"In our opinion, Disney’s approach to OTT in the form of three separate services is reductive and is akin to launching networks for different demographics on television which is now essentially being replicated on the internet," the analysts said. "This is likely to limit its market opportunity and increase its operating and capital costs over time relative to a simplified one service approach (at least for non-sports content)."

The analysts said that Disney will need to clarify its bundling and pricing strategy in the near future for investors, as well as its plans to acquire the 40% of Hulu it will still not own once the Disney-Fox deal is complete.

READ MORE:Morgan Stanley predicted how Disney's Netflix competitor will fare in the streaming wars — and said it could be a $6 billion business

During an earnings call in August, Disney CEO Bob Iger said that "a number of products" will be affected by licensing agreements, particularly "Star Wars," which means that the streaming service will not have Disney's full library of content at launch.

According to an August Bloomberg report, Disney had been trying to buy back the rights to old "Star Wars" movies, but receiving pushback from Turner Broadcasting.

Barclays analysts see that as a risk, and said that Disney will have to work through licensing agreements "in order to have enough critical mass of content." They also said that Disney needs to figure out global distribution, "neither of which are trivial challenges."

But not even a bulk of successful content guarantees success for the service, according to analysts. 

"Success in OTT is more about: (a) content aggregation rather than segmentation, which is Disney’s go to market strategy at present (b) technology skills (such as discovery and recommendation) and data rather than content and (c) experience," analysts said.

They added that legacy media organizations were more oriented to selling wholesale (to pay-TV distributors) rather than retail (to customers directly). "These differences need a big shift in cultural and organization orientation (especially reporting lines), in our opinion, which is not a trivial challenge," the analysts wrote.

On top of all of these possible complications, though, is the Fox deal, which is expected to close on January 1.

"The company’s pivot will happen during what is likely to be a complex integration culturally between Fox and Disney," analysts said.

But even considering the potential issues, Barclays analysts believe Disney has "the key mix of assets to be successful," and think its upcoming Investor Day should act as an opportunity to clarify questions and give investors a sense of the scale of Disney's ambitions.

SEE ALSO: Warner Bros. triumphed over Disney in public sentiment after hiring James Gunn for 'Suicide Squad 2'

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How 'The Price Is Right' is made

• Barclays reports increased profits in the third quarter of 2018, with trading and investment banking performing particularly strongly.
• Pre-tax profits climbed 32% to £1.46 billion, the bank said, up significantly from the £1.1 billion profit reported in the same period last year.
• Much of this outperformance was down to the bank's under-fire trading and investment banking arms, with markets trading revenues increasing 19% to £1.2 billion.
• The results will buoy the bank's management which is facing pressure from activist investor Edward Bramson over the investment banking unit.

Barclays produced an unexpectedly strong set of results in the third quarter of 2018, boosted by an impressive performance from the British bank's trading arm.

Overall, Barclays reported a net third-quarter profit of £1 billion, well above market expectations, and above the £583 million profit made in the same period last financial year. Pre-tax profits climbed 32% to £1.46 billion, the bank said.

Much of this outperformance was down to the bank's under-fire trading and investment banking arms, with markets trading revenues increasing 19% to £1.2 billion. Bond, currency and commodity trading revenues increased from £627 million to £688 million.

"During the third quarter our corporate and investment bank outperformed peers again in markets, with a 19 per cent increase in income," Barclays CEO Jes Staley said in a statement alongside the results.

The results will buoy the bank's management which is facing pressure from activist investor Edward Bramson over the investment banking unit.

Bramson wants to shut almost all trading activity at Barclays' investment bank as part of plans to cut costs and boost returns.

While overall profits at the bank increased, total revenues dropped a little, falling from £5.17 billion in Q3 last year, to £5.13 billion this year.

"A jump in profits at Barclays can be largely put down to a lower level of bad loans, stemming from improved economic forecasts, stronger sterling, and some one-off adjustments," Laith Khalaf, a senior analyst at FTSE 100 investment firm Hargreaves Lansdown said.

"That’s all well and good, but it’s doesn’t give investors a great deal to hang hopes on in terms of profitability going forward."

Barclays shares are broadly flat on Wednesday, trading higher by just 0.36% as of 9.05 a.m. BST (4.05 a.m. ET).

SEE ALSO: The cohead of Barclays' research business is leaving as the UK bank's senior shake-up continues

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How smart contracts will work

Barclays Plc has picked Nigel Higgins, the deputy chairman of Rothschild & Co , as the company's next chairman, Sky News reported on Thursday.

Higgins has been chosen to succeed John McFarlane, the current chairman, and is in advanced talks with Barclays, Sky News reported. http://bit.ly/2EXjPFR

(Reporting by Ishita Chigilli Palli in Bengaluru; editing by David Evans)

Join the conversation about this story »

• Barclays, RBS, and Lloyds, some of the UK's largest lenders, crash more than 4.5% after Theresa May's Brexit plan failed to win over her party, and the market. 
• Top ministers have resigned, the Prime Minister faces a vote of no-confidence, and the pound fell more than 1.6%. 

UK bank stocks tanked after Prime Minister Theresa May failed to win over her party or investors with her Brexit plan. 

Royal Bank of Scotland is trading down 9.1%, Lloyds dropped 6.1%, while Barclays fell 4.9%. Those companies, along with shares of British homebuilders, were among the biggest decliners in the European benchmark Stoxx 600 Index. Barclays at one point touched levels not seen since June 2016, the month of the Brexit vote. 

"The market has taken a big red pen to stocks which are heavily exposed to the UK economy like the banks, retailers and housebuilders," according to Laith Khalaf, senior analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown. "The potential for an orderly Brexit to unravel in the next few days is causing further distress."

May's job is on the line following a tense session in the House of Commons Thursday. Key Cabinet members resigned in protest, including Brexit Secretary Dominic Raab, Work and Pensions Secretary Esther McVey, and some other Conservative ministers. 

UK homebuilders and financial firms, alongside other UK exposed stocks, took a hit today with Legal & General and Persimmon the worst affected. Budget airline Easyjet is also down 6.8%, on fears the carrier might have to stop flying some routes in the event of a no-deal Brexit.  

The pound traded as low as 1.8% down after the resignations, and sits 1.6% lower as of 2.55 p.m. (9.55 a.m. EST). 

SEE ALSO: Theresa May faces leadership challenge as multiple ministers quit over her Brexit deal

SEE ALSO: UBS: A UK recession and pound-dollar parity are on the horizon, and Brexit risks are rising 'literally' by the minute

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This mind-melting thought experiment of Einstein's reveals how to manipulate time

• Barclays estimates that US tariffs on the European automotive sector could knock as much as $75 billion from growth in the Eurozone next year.
• Trump has threatened to impose 25% tariffs on all autos and auto parts coming into the US to extract concessions from trading partners including the European Union and Canada.
• He is yet to follow through on such threats, but with trade set to dominate the agenda at this weekend's G20 conference in Buenos Aires, Argentina, discussion of auto tariffs is set to resurface.
• A 25% tariffs on autos could see euro area growth from 1.6% to 1.2%.

An escalation of the global trade conflict which saw US President Donald Trump levy increased tariffs on the European automotive sector could knock as much as $75 billion from growth in the eurozone next year, according to analysts at Barclays.

Writing this week, a Barclays team led by Francois Cabau estimated that if Trump were to impose 25% tariffs on the import of European cars into the US, it could knock as much as 0.4 percentage points off growth in the single currency area in 2019. That would equate to around $75 billion of lost output.

Trump has threatened to impose 25% tariffs on all autos and auto parts coming into the US to extract concessions from trading partners including the European Union and Canada.

He is yet to follow through on such threats, but earlier this month it was reported that the White House was circulating a report discussing the prospect of auto tariffs, and with trade set to dominate the agenda at this weekend's G20 conference in Buenos Aires, Argentina, the threat of auto tariffs is set to resurface.

Read more: Trump claims car companies are 'pouring' into the US. The reality is a lot more troubling

"Higher tariffs on EU automobiles have been directly cited and thus remain a serious threat ahead of the G20 meetings," Barclays' team said on Thursday.

"We explore a scenario in which the US increases tariffs on EU passenger cars from 2.5% to 25%."

"We estimate an increase of US tariffs on European cars from the current 2.5% to 25% would result in a drop in euro-area net exports of roughly 2.0%, lowering EA GDP growth about 0.1pp through the direct impact of trade on growth," the note said.

Combining a traditional mechanical analysis, and a Barclays specific value at risk model, the bank estimates that this would subsequently lower estimated growth in the euro area from 1.6% to 1.2% in 2019.

Such a fall in GDP growth, Barclays' team says, could force the European Central Bank into a "policy response."

Although it doesn't specify what form of response, it would likely come in the form of either the restarting of quantitative easing — which is set to come to an end at the end of December — or a further cut in interest rates, below their current level of -0.4%.

Barclays' team was keen to stress that a 0.4 percentage point drop in GDP growth is not its base case, but added that the "potential ramifications are serious enough to warrant a deep exploration of the issue."

It added however, that the initial 0.4 percentage point estimate could increase "as the US-China trade dispute escalates, putting further stress on the Chinese economy, and rippling into Europe."

SEE ALSO: Volvo's $30 billion IPO is officially off, and Trump's trade war may be to blame

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A sleep expert explains what happens to your body and brain if you don't get enough sleep

• Barclays promoted 85 employees to the rank of managing director effective January 1.
• The number of new MDs at Barclays is smaller than those at some other competitors.
• "The 85 colleagues promoted will continue to make a significant contribution."

Barclays just unveiled its new crop of managing directors, naming 85 employees to the position effective January 1. "They are viewed as the future leaders of our organisation," Barclays said in an announcement on Friday.

“Our new managing directors have all consistently demonstrated strong client focus, outstanding performance, and excellent leadership," Tim Throsby, president of Barclays Bank PLC and CEO of Barclays International, said in the release. "It makes us proud to see our colleagues progress in their careers, and I am confident that the 85 colleagues promoted will continue to make a significant contribution across Barclays International.”

Investment-banking boss Throsby, who joined from JPMorgan in 2015, has said he planned to unleash “commercial zeal” at the unit. The bank earlier this year culled about 100 senior investment bank staff. 

The number of new MDs at Barclays is smaller than those at some other competitors. Citigroup just promoted a new class of 125 managing directors. Bank of America Merrill Lynch promoted nearly 140 employees to MD in late November. Morgan Stanley promoted 153 employees to MD in January— up from the 140 it promoted in 2017.

At Goldman Sachs, where MD is one rung below the prestigious role of partner and the classes are announced every two years, 509 employees were promoted to MD in 2017 and 69 were promoted to partner in November.

Here is the list of the class of 2018 MDs: 

• Robert Agnew
• Shilpa Akella
• Abdeslam Alaoui
• Gonzalo Ardura
• Jan Asboth
• Umang Bhatia
• Daniel Blankenship
• Arnaud Caussin
• Leo Clark
• Alison Coen
• Patrick Coffey
• Alisa Copeman
• Donna Cory
• Nicholas Cunningham
• Alejandro de la Campa
• David Dehorn
• Shabab Ditta
• Rory Elliott
• Nicholas Fall
• Arndt Franzen
• Stefanie Frese
• Anca Gagea
• Vineet Garg
• David Garratt
• Jonathan Gerst
• Mariadele Gilardi
• Ruben Grau
• Adam Gross
• Aiden Hallett
• Daniel Hernandez-Andersen
• Robert Hone
• Ben Hutson
• Rahul Jaising
• Lawrence Jamieson
• Staffan Johansson
• Priya Karani
• Navneet Kaur
• Helen Kelly
• James Kim
• Jason Kivett
• Asuka Kiya
• Sibtain Lalji
• Gideon Lapson
• Colin Macleod
• Luca Maiorana
• Karla Maloof
• Melissa Mariaschin
• Pat McCormack
• Barry McQuaid
• Siddharth Mehla
• Ben Middleton
• Marjorie Miller
• Tejas Moogimane
• Brooke Navarro
• Sita Noble
• Simon O'Callaghan
• William O'Malley
• Angela Ottaway
• Andrew Packer
• Maria Parpou
• Hadley Parrie
• Manav Patnaik
• Claire Pearson
• Simon Polbennikov
• Ted Post
• Benedict Redmond
• James Roberts
• Hardy Saat
• Rob Scott
• David Seal
• Ksenia Sheveleva
• Stephen Smith
• Adrian Stoll
• Ravi Suresh
• Nicholas Fall
• Arndt Franzen
• Stefanie Frese
• Anca Gagea
• Vineet Garg
• David Garratt
• Jonathan Gerst
• Mariadele Gilardi
• Ruben Grau
• Adam Gross
• Aiden Hallett
• Daniel Hernandez-Andersen
• Robert Hone
• Ben Hutson
• Rahul Jaising
• Lawrence Jamieson
• Staffan Johansson
• Priya Karani
• Navneet Kaur
• Helen Kelly
• James Kim
• Jason Kivett
• Asuka Kiya
• Sibtain Lalji
• Gideon Lapson
• Colin Macleod
• Luca Maiorana
• Karla Maloof
• Melissa Mariaschin
• Pat McCormack
• Barry McQuaid
• Siddharth Mehla
• Ben Middleton
• Marjorie Miller
• Tejas Moogimane
• Brooke Navarro
• Sita Noble
• Simon O'Callaghan
• William O'Malley
• Angela Ottaway
• Andrew Packer
• Maria Parpou
• Hadley Parrie
• Manav Patnaik
• Claire Pearson
• Simon Polbennikov
• Ted Post
• Benedict Redmond
• James Roberts
• Hardy Saat
• Rob Scott
• David Seal
• Ksenia Sheveleva
• Stephen Smith
• Adrian Stoll
• Ravi Suresh

Read more:Citigroup is promoting 125 employees to managing director — we've got the internal memo with the full list of names

SEE ALSO: Bank of America Merrill Lynch just promoted nearly 140 employees to managing director — we got a leaked list of all the names

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The legendary economist who predicted the housing crisis says the US will win the trade war

• Barclays just hired two new executives, Sanjeev Mordani and Ravi Singh, to work under the chief information officer of the international unit.
• While naming some new senior hires, Barclays has cut about 100 senior staff members this year.
• Insiders at Barclays say the cuts and managing-director promotions in December signal a desire to give promising up-and-comers opportunities for advancement.

Barclays just hired two senior executives, Sanjeev Mordani and Ravi Singh, to work under the chief investment officer of its international unit, Art Mbanefo.

Mordani, who led cross-asset solutions and strategies at Bank of America Merrill Lynch, will join Barclays in the chief investment office and will be responsible for driving the structured-finance business in the Americas.

"We are confident that his creativity and strong client relationships will accelerate our efforts to enhance Barclays' client offering," the bank said in a memo sent to staff and seen by Business Insider.

Singh, a Credit Suisse and Goldman Sachs alum, will also join Barclays' chief investment office. His role is unclear, but the memo said "his entrepreneurial spirit and strong track record will significantly enhance our ability to deliver additional top line revenue and drive returns."

"These appointments are additional examples of the high impact talent we are attracting to Barclays, and demonstrate the scale of opportunities in front of us," Mbanefo said in the memo.

Read more: The cohead of Barclays' research business is leaving as the UK bank's senior shake-up continues

The hires come after the bank named a fresh crop of managing directors, promoting 85 employees to the rank as of January 1, 2019. While Tim Throsby, a JPMorgan alum who now heads Barclays' corporate and investment bank, has named some top senior-level hires since joining in 2016, the bank has slashed managing-director roles and other senior jobs as part of a broader reorganization that kicked off earlier this year.

Barclays is known as one of the more top-heavy firms in the City of London, and insiders there say the cuts to senior staff this year and the promotions in December signal a desire to give promising up-and-comers opportunities for advancement.

Mbanefo has been taking on more responsibilities this year. His responsibilities include running Barclays' Financial Resource Management team and overseeing business managers and the office of the CEO, according to an announcement at the bank in late August.

SEE ALSO: Barclays just named its new crop of managing directors — here is the list

Join the conversation about this story »

• Former Barclays CEO John Varley is among four defendants on trial for fraud allegations linked to 2008's global financial crisis.
• The trial is set to take four months over charges related to the bank's emergency refinancing arrangements from investors in Qatar during the crisis. 
• It is the first jury trial for a chief executive of a major bank implicated in the crash. There is a possibility of a 10-year prison sentence for the defendants. 

A landmark case in London could potentially imprison one of the highest-level banking executives ever charged in relation to the 2008 financial crisis. 

Proceedings officially begin on Monday for the trial of Barclays CEO John Varley, who is charged with fraud. The trial, still in its early stages, is part of the UK's first set of criminal cases pursuing senior bankers for crisis-era events.

The Financial Times reported that Varley is one of four defendants facing charges related to the bank's arrangements with Middle Eastern investors in the wake of the crisis. In a bid to avoid being part of the British government's bailout effort — which would have made the bank look weak — Barclays reached out to investors to secure independent financing worth £11.8 billion ($15.5 billion), with £6.1 billion coming from Qatar. Britain's Serious Fraud Office (SFO) alleges that some £300 million was spent by the bankers to induce the investment from Qatar, which was not fully disclosed to the market or other investors. The four defendants all deny the charges, which carry a 10-year maximum sentence.

After six years and interviews with at least 40 people, the case is heading to trial. 

The case is a landmark moment for the SFO, which recently made personnel changes to ensure the flagship case made it to trial after its general counsel quit the watchdog for a law firm.

The SFO previously secured an 11-year prison term for criminal bankers

The stakes are high for the British financial watchdog after two other high-profile SFO cases were thrown out in recent years, including the trial of former Tesco supermarket executives over an alleged accounting scandal, and charges against brokers who allegedly rigged interest rate that banks use to lend with each other, known as Libor.

Similarly, the SFO saw its case against Barclays – separate to the case against the individual ex-bosses – over Qatari fundraising dismissed by a court last year. The SFO later lost an appeal to reinstate those charges.

Still, the SFO has had other wins: British trader Tom Hayes in 2015 became the first to be sentenced to jail for rigging Libor, the institutional lending rate. Other convictions followed. Hayes, who is appealing, is currently serving an 11-year prison sentence.

Though proceedings officially begin Monday for Varley, a jury is not expected to be sworn in until mid-January, with opening arguments not starting until January 21.

The other defendants, the FT said, include Roger Jenkins, Tom Kalaris and Richard Boath, the former European head of the investment bank’s financial institutions group.

Editor's note: A previous version of this story was corrected to say that Tom Hayes was among a few to be convicted for rigging Libor. 

SEE ALSO: The bizarre story of 1MDB, the Goldman Sachs-backed Malaysian fund that turned into one of the biggest scandals in financial history

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The founder of the World Economic Forum shares what he sees as the biggest threat to the global economy

• Corporate raider Edward Bramson is agitating for more control of Barclays and is maneuvering to change the composition of the company's board of directors. 
• The latest gambit by Bramson comes after Barclays rebuffed his effort to become a non-executive director. 
• Bramson's hedge fund Sherborne Investors holds a more than 5% in Barclays and has been lobbying for cuts to its investment bank. 
• That strategy is in tension with that of CEO Jes Staley, who has made the investment a cornerstone of his turnaround effort. 

Edward Bramson, the activist thorn in the side of Barclays, is ramping up his efforts to sway the British lender's strategy and push for cuts to its investment bank. 

In a letter to investors of his UK-based hedge fund Sherborne Investors, Bramson said he's lost confidence in his dealings with Barclays and is maneuvering to change the composition of the company's board of directors by taking a vote to shareholders, according to a report from Bloomberg. 

“After considering the situation carefully, we do not have confidence that continued engagement with the company, strictly as an outsider, will produce any more measurable results in the future than it has to date," Bramson said.

The latest flare-up in tensions between Barclays and Bramson — who revealed a more than 5% stake in the bank last year — comes after the lender recently rebuffed the hedge-fund titan's bid to take a non-executive director role on the board.

Read more: Barclays just named its new crop of managing directors — here is the list

Bramson and Barclays CEO are fundamentally at odds over the bank's strategy: Staley has made the investment bank the cornerstone of his turnaround strategy, while Bramson thinks its a resource drain and wants cuts to the division. 

Like its peers, Barclays' shares fell last year, but the firm's investment bank had stellar results in the third quarter. 

To gain traction for his vision, Bramson told his investors he could seek for a shareholder vote to change the board composition at Barclay's annual meeting in May or in a separate session. 

See also: 

• 2018 has been one of the wildest years in M&A since the financial crisis — here are the 40 biggest investment-banker moves
• Wall Street banks have been fighting like crazy over top tech bankers, and they're spending millions to get them in the door
• Barclays has the fastest growing stock trading team around — and it’s posing a threat to some of the biggest players

Join the conversation about this story »

• British politicians will vote on Prime Minister Theresa May's Brexit Withdrawal Agreement Tuesday, with City of London banks spelling out a variety of options to clients. 
• Citi has advised clients not to trade the pound today because of the possibility of huge swings in its valuation.
• Barclays have additional staff working on trading desks in Singapore, New York and London ahead of the vote. 

On Tuesday evening, British lawmakers will vote on Theresa May's Brexit deal, with the prime minister widely expected to suffer a crushing, and possibly record-breaking, defeat in the House of Commons.

While the outcome of the vote seems fairly clear, what happens next is not, and financial markets are scrambling for any helpful information in the hours before the vote.

A JPMorgan insider told Business Insider that its London trading desk would be working later than usual but stressed that the vote was not expected to be a huge market moving event, unlike 2016's referendum. 

Meanwhile, Citigroup's private banking arm has told clients not to trade the pound because of expected volatility Tuesday. 

"Over the next 24 hours what all we’re going to find out is the degree to which May loses, how much she loses by," David Bailin, global head of investments at Citi Private Bank, told Bloomberg in Singapore. "That is not something that one actually trades on."

Similarly, Barclays has brought in additional staff to cope with demand for information from clients ahead of the vote. with numerous staff set to manage potential risks from the decision's fallout. FX and rates teams will be in earlier and stay later in Singapore, London, and New York on Tuesday.

A rejection of the Withdrawal Agreement, which sets the terms for the UK's exit and transition period away from the European Union, "wouldn’t come as a shock to the markets," according to Emmanuel Cau, head of European equities at Barclays. 

The pound has gained 1% against the dollar in the past month despite Brexit related uncertainties. The world's fourth most liquid currency market could tank 10% if an unexpected or undesirable Brexit outcome occurs, according to Citi. 

While markets are thought to have priced in a defeat for the Prime Minister — perhaps one of the largest in parliamentary history — the pound and UK equities could rally if the vote does unexpectedly pass.

"This is an uncomfortable time for investors. In such circumstances it’s a good idea to remember the basics of investing," said Laith Khalaf, senior analyst at Hargreaves Lansdown. "That means keeping diversified, focusing on long term goals, and avoiding attempts to time the market as you may miss key days when stock prices rise sharply."

Reports suggest that the opposition Labour party will trigger a vote of no confidence in the government immediately after it is voted down, which could ultimately lead to an election.

A variety of City of London advisors have already advised clients that a rejection of May's deal could lead to a UK general election in 2019. 

The UK is currently set to leave the EU on March 29. The pound is flat against the dollar as of 9.20 a.m in London (4.20 a.m EST). 

SEE ALSO: City of London analysts are warning clients to prepare for a UK election this year as May's Brexit deal collapses

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I went on Beyoncé's 22-day diet — and I lost 15 pounds

• Barclays, which issues branded credit cards for Apple, JetBlue, and the NFL, has a practice of rejecting applications from former customers who have fallen behind on payments, even if they've improved their credit history.
• The bank's practice of not pulling credit reports for former customers is uncommon among banks willing to discuss it.
• Other banks say they always request credit reports, even for former customers.

Few financial sectors are as deeply embedded in the lives of Americans as the credit-card industry. It aims to protect consumers from fraudulent transactions, volatile incomes, and lost wallets. Certain credit cards offer attractive perks, such as free travel and cash back, while others are more likely to trap consumers in endless cycles of accumulating debt.

Most significant, its products underpin the US credit-reporting system, which governs access to home mortgages, automobile loans, and credit cards themselves. Who has access to credit, and how that access is determined, matters a great deal.

I had to relearn this lesson last year after I embarked on improving my credit history by applying for a number of cards. I did so to decrease my "credit-utilization rate," which refers to the percentage of available credit you're using. Nearly a third of an individual's credit score, as calculated by the Fair Isaac Corp., or FICO, is based on this statistic.

While the bulk of my efforts succeeded, in a few cases my applications were rejected. My search for an explanation led to obscure online forums in which credit-card enthusiasts spoke of "blacklists" and "lifetime bans," and to an overlooked corner of the industry that dictates the availability of consumer credit.

My personal process for obtaining credit was essentially random and heavily influenced by advertising. I applied for one card because I saw an online ad for it, another because a credit-monitoring app recommended it to me, and still another because an airline attendant handed me a physical trifold application. Most of these were approved. But two cards turned me down: the Uber Visa Card and the AAdvantage Aviator Red World Elite MasterCard.

At first glance, these cards have nothing to do with each other. They're associated with different companies and belong to competing payment networks. But according to their rejection letters, and the fineprint on each card's website, they have one important thing in common: They're both issued by Barclays, the British multinational bank.

Founded in London in 1690, Barclays is one of the oldest banks on earth. It entered the US credit-card market in 2004, with its acquisition of Juniper Bank, and now holds more than $24 billion in consumer credit-card debt.

Besides Uber and American Airlines, it issues cards for consumer brands like the National Football League, Frontier Airlines, Barnes & Noble, Priceline, JetBlue, and Apple. Barclays has established its US presence in other ways too. It owns the naming rights to Barclays Center, the massive indoor arena in Brooklyn, as well as Atlantic Avenue–Barclays Center, the subway station underneath the arena. It's the busiest train station of New York City's most populous borough.

A few weeks after I applied for the Uber and AAdvantage cards, I received letters from Barclays Bank Delaware, the subsidiary that operates the bank's US credit-card business. Except for the name of the card, both had the same language:

"We have reviewed your application and determined that we are unable to approve you for … the following reason(s): Our records indicate that a previous credit card account that you held with Barclays Bank Delaware experienced charge-off, bankruptcy, severe delinquency or other negative performance. A credit bureau report was not used in making this determination."

My initial reaction was confusion: I didn't remember ever having a credit card through Barclays. But when I went back and looked through my old emails, I discovered that I previously had two such cards: one associated with Apple and another with Sallie Mae. I remember applying for and using both cards, but I'd forgotten they were serviced by Barclays.

The embarrassing thing is that both letters were largely accurate. Several years ago, I paid a debt-settlement company to contact each of my creditors to negotiate a lower balance and a repayment schedule. To open those negotiations, however, I first needed to stop making payments on them. That’s probably why Barclays mentioned "severe delinquency."

It ended up working out. The company reduced the balance of the first card by about $850 and the second one by $1,000. I eventually paid off those and a few other accounts, thereby avoiding bankruptcy. My credit score, after taking a nosedive, has inched upward since.

The letters from Barclays drew my curiosity because, for a few years after the aforementioned negotiations, I was rejected by every credit card I applied for, and for the same reason: My credit score and credit history, as recorded by the three major credit-reporting bureaus, were in disarray. This was discouraging but not entirely hopeless. After all, there are ways to improve both.

The Barclays letters, by contrast, seemed to suggest that my eligibility for another Barclays credit card had been revoked, because their internal file for me overrode my external credit history. They wouldn't even ask for it, as stated in the last sentence of the bank's explanation: "A credit bureau report was not used in making this determination."

"Several different things go into underwriting criteria," Barclays spokesman Matt Fields said. "We definitely use all three credit bureaus. They are used dozens and dozens and dozens of times every day for new customers. Another piece of that, though, is that we do look at whether an applicant has a past or current relationship with us."

Fields added that, while no two applications are alike, the bank followed certain guidelines when assessing them. "Let's say someone had a previous relationship with us, where they charged off," he went on. "As a general practice, we are not looking to do business with someone who has not honored their obligations with us."

I later found other people in a similar position. They had flocked to online forums devoted to credit cards (and associated rewards programs) to complain about being placed on the so-called Barclays blacklist and receiving a "lifetime ban" from the bank. Some detailed their frustrating experiences with the bank's customer-service representatives, who struggled to explain their employer's policy.

Two things make that policy especially confusing. The first is that the majority of their cards carry the branding of other companies. Of the 23 cards it issues, only three are primarily branded as Barclays. Of the remaining 20 cards, only five carry a small Barclays logo on the front of the card. The websites of the remaining 15 cards — none of which have obvious Barclays branding, and which account for 65% of the bank's offerings — bury their Barclays affiliations in fine print.

This arrangement isn't problematic in and of itself. Branded credit cards are not new. But it gets confusing when paired with Barclays' policy of rejecting former customers based on the bank's internal records, rather than external credit reports.

If you had a credit card through JetBlue, which offered JetBlue-specific rewards, you likely associated that credit card with JetBlue. So it would seem counterintuitive for Barclays, which operates JetBlue's credit card, to reject you for a credit card associated with a different company simply because that company also contracted with Barclays.

The second thing that makes this confusing is that the degree to which Barclays' relies on internal records to evaluate former cardholders who became delinquent — to the point of ignoring their updated credit history, even if that history has been rehabilitated — appears to be uncommon in the credit-card industry, at least among the institutions that were willing to discuss the practice.

I came to this conclusion by asking the largest credit-card issuers in the US about their policies. Three of the five largest issuers — JP Morgan Chase, Capital One, Bank of America — confirmed to Business Insider that they always pull an applicant's credit report when they apply for a new line of credit. Wells Fargo, a smaller issuer, confirmed it does so as well.

Other banks were less willing to discuss this aspect of their operations. Citigroup, US Bancorp, and Discover declined to comment. American Express and Synchrony did not respond to multiple requests for comment. In fact, Barclays was the only bank willing to confirm that it rejects former cardholders who became delinquent, without seeking their credit reports, as a matter of policy.

In 2017, the top 10 issuers of credit cards in the US held a combined $712 billion in credit-card debt. Slightly more than half of that debt, $358.5 billion, was held by banks that always consider external credit reports. The remaining $353.5 billion belonged to banks that either ignored external credit reports for certain applicants (in the case of Barclays) or refused to disclose their practices.

Their differing responses, or lack of responses, are noteworthy because the US closely regulates how consumer credit histories may be used to make underwriting decisions. Since 1970, when the Fair Credit Reporting Act became law, consumers have had the right to obtain a copy of their credit histories from Experian, Equifax, and TransUnion. They can also challenge the accuracy of those histories. In most cases, adverse information is automatically removed after seven years.

At the same time, the law doesn't require banks to consider those credit histories when assessing the risk of a prior customer. And that can lead to inconsistent policies across different issuers.

"It certainly depends on the lender as there is no rule one way or the other," said John Ulzheimer, who has studied and written about the credit-card industry for nearly three decades. "Your previous performance with a lender is absolutely considered if and when you make future applications with that same lender.

"If you defaulted on or discharged previous debts with a lender they may simply choose to never do business with you again as a matter of policy."

Most issuers do both, he added: "They'll review their own master file for previous performance records and then, if that's satisfactory, they'll pull a credit report and credit score as a basis for their decision."

A certain degree of inconsistency among financial institutions is understandable: It's not as if competing issuers coordinate, or would want to coordinate, their underwriting processes. But when only a handful of institutions decide who gets credit, and how much, those inconsistencies take on a greater weight. They exist in tension with the fact that having good credit, which heavily depends on access to credit, is a necessity for more and more of our lives.

Fields, the Barclays spokesman, clarified that the bank sometimes reverses rejections if it's made aware of "extenuating circumstances," and encouraged me to call the bank's customer service line to ask about my case. He didn't know how long Barclays retains records about former customers. But the upshot of our conversation was clear: Because of my prior history with Barclays, I would likely be unable to obtain another credit card through them, at least for a while.

Later, when I called their help line, a Barclays representative told me that he couldn't discuss my applications or the underlying reasons they were rejected, because it had been more than 90 days since I applied. I would need to reapply for both and then contest the inevitable rejection letters.

A particular practice at a particular bank — and a relatively small one, at least in the US — can't fully explain the broader system to which it belongs. Obviously, Barclays is not legally or morally obligated to extend a line of credit to me or anyone else. But the power Barclays and its peers exert on the personal lives of Americans should not be ignored.

Credit doesn't just dictate what kind of cellphone you can buy, or whether you can consolidate student loans under a lower interest rate. It can also influence where you live, where you work, and whom you marry.

Remember this the next time you apply for a credit card.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The founder of the World Economic Forum shares what he sees as the biggest threat to the global economy

• German authorities are ramping up discussions about a possible merger between Deutsche Bank and Commerzbank, the Financial Times reported.
• Bloomberg said regulators seek to merge Deutsche Bank with a different European lender.
• "We think the reason for these headlines is that profitability may have deteriorated further in the fourth quarter," Barclays analysts said as it cut its profit and stock price estimates.
• "We think there is a reasonable chance Deutsche Bank preannounce Q418 results," Barclays said.

Barclays analysts say they see red flags in reports about Deutsche Bank potentially merging with another rival.

"We keep seeing press articles that Deutsche Bank will merge with another bank," Barclays analysts led by Amit Goel said in a report Thursday.

"We think the reason for these headlines is that profitability may have deteriorated further in the fourth quarter of 2018, and that the current strategy/targets are looking less and less viable."

Barclays is thus cutting adjusted profit before tax estimates by 3%, 5%, and 7% for last year, this year and 2020, respectively. That's below Deutsche Bank's own targets, the report said. The UK bank also cut its price target for Deutsche Bank stock to 7 euros from 8 euros. 

The Financial Times reported on Thursday that the German finance ministry asked the banking regulator to share the results of its analysis of a potential merger between Deutsche Bank and Commerzbank. And Bloomberg on Wednesday said German regulators prefer that Deutsche Bank merge with another European firm, not Commerzbank.  

"It is not clear to us why another bank would look to merge with Deutsche Bank," Barclays said. "Given the size of the balance sheet (1.4 trillion euros) and the current state of Capital Markets Union, amongst other factors, there would be several impediments to a cross border transaction."

Deutsche Bank shares fell more than 50% in 2018, hitting record lows on numerous occasions.

"We think there is a reasonable chance Deutsche Bank preannounce Q418 results," the report said. The bank is scheduled to report earnings on February 1. 

Takeover or merger talk is nothing new for Deutsche. Citigroup CEO Michael Corbat has reportedly in the past told German business publication Manager Magazin that there was too much "overlap" between Citigroup's and Deutsche Bank's businesses, and that a takeover based purely on cost savings wasn't a good idea.

A combined German lender is said to have been on the country's agenda for a while in an attempt to prevent the exodus of foreign capital from the economy and create a banking heavyweight.

SEE ALSO: A top Deutsche Bank strategist reveals a game plan that earned 10% as stocks plummeted last year — and how investors can profit from it now

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The founder of the World Economic Forum shares what he sees as the biggest threat to the global economy

• Fintech lender MarketInvoice has secured Series B funding from major banks including Barclays and Santander's fintech fund Inno Ventures.
• It's the first major UK fintech debt and equity funding in 2019, coming just ahead of Brexit. 
• The funding will help MarketInvoice expand its UK business operations and values the company at £85 million ($110 million).

UK fintech MarketInvoice has kicked off the funding market for 2019 with the backing of Barclays and Santander as part of a £56 million ($72 million) debt and equity financing. 

The companies declined to comment on valuation, but documents filed with Companies House suggest the deal valued MarketInvoice at about £85 million, according to the FT. 

The deal demonstrates a disruptive shift in the banking industry. The success of challenger banks and payment services such as Revolut and investment platforms including Robinhood have highlighted the potential gold mine in tapping millennial spending. Big banks have taken notice, with Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan, UBS among those that are also ramping up their expansion.

Read more:Once big banks crack the code of how to win millennials, star fintech unicorns may be crushed

Barclays and Santander's Inno Ventures fintech fund led the £26 million in equity funding for MarketInvoice while Israeli technology fund Viola Credit, who also participated in the equity round, will provide a debt facility of up to £30 million. European venture fund Northzone also provided equity funding. 

MarketInvoice, founded in 2011, specialises in invoice finance, in which small and medium-sized businesses smooth out cash flow by borrowing against money they are owed by customers.

Banks are increasingly keen to work with disruptive fintechs, even if they effectively compete for the same customers.

"We have a long term partnership with Barclays which we launched last September," said Anil Stocker, CEO of MarketInvoice in an interview. "It's provided us with hundreds of leads and helps us connect to SMEs across the UK." 

MarketInvoice also offers unsecured loans, and has extended a total of more than £2 billion to businesses so far with the funding expected to expand the company's international reach. 

“Collaborating with fintech companies like MarketInvoice is an integral part of Barclays’ strategy for accelerating growth," said Ian Rand, CEO of Barclays Business Bank. Barclays announced a partnership with MarketInvoice last year and has continued its programme with this investment. 

Since launching in 2014, Santander's Inno Ventures has invested in 22 portfolio companies and has been named as the most active bank-backed fintech corporate venture in the world by CB Insights.

SEE ALSO: A fintech 'brain drain' is crippling once-mighty London: 10 UK start-up leaders contemplate life after Brexit

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un is 35 — here's how he became one of the world's scariest dictators

• The fraud trial against the former CEO of Barclays and three other senior directors or executives began in London Wednesday. The defendants, including former CEO John Varley, and three co-workers Roger Jenkins, Thomas Kalaris, and Richard Boath, have all pleaded not guilty to all charges. 
• It's the biggest trial for the British finance industry since the financial crisis. It relates to fundraising activities by the bank in 2008 with Qatar during the crisis. 
• Prosecutors allege that the bosses entered into dishonest mechanisms with Qatar to secretly pay out commissions and secure capital injections, to avoid a bailout from the UK Government. 

The opening of one of the most important trials in recent British finance history got underway on Wednesday in London with allegations that former Barclays bosses — including its CEO — entered into dishonest agreements to avoid a government bailout. 

The defendants, including former CEO John Varley, and three co-workers Roger Jenkins, Thomas Kalaris, and Richard Boath, all deny conspiracy to commit fraud by false representation. Varley and Jenkins deny a second charge of fraud.

It's the first UK jury trial which alleges wrongdoing related to the financial crisis. The crisis threatened to collapse the global banking system, and several banks actually went under, including Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, and Northern Rock.

Other UK lenders were forced to take funding bailouts from the government in order to meet their capital ratios — the metric on which a bank's stability is judged. But former Barclays' executives activity in raising capital privately from Qatari investors was later investigated for alleged fraud.

The Qatari companies, Qatar Investment Authority and Qatar Holdings, invested £6 billion ($7.8 billion) in Barclays during capital-raising activities in 2008. 

“Those agreements were in truth not genuine agreements for services,”  said Ed Brown, a prosecutor for the UK Serious Fraud Office (SFO). “They were dishonest mechanisms to hide additional fees being paid to the Qataris for their investment."

Barclays paid £322 million in additional fees to the Qataris, according to Brown. These fees came in the form of two separate "advisory services agreements" (ASAs) of £42 million and £280 million, respectively. 

"The ASA fees were in reality subscription fees or commissions, said Brown. "The ASA fees were, and remained, payments for the Qataris’ agreement to invest. The ASAs were no more than mechanisms for the disguised payment of additional subscription fees and/or hidden discounts from the ostensible price paid by Qatar/Challenger for their investments."

Judge Robert Jay is overseeing the trial, which is expected to last six months at London’s Southwark Crown Court.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: I went on Beyoncé's 22-day diet — and I lost 15 pounds

• Activist investor Edward Bramson has yet to lay out a vision for how he wants British lender Barclays to alter its strategy, despite taking a major stake and publicly agitating for change, according to the bank's CEO, Jes Staley.
• Bramson, whose hedge fund Sherborne Investors owns a 5% stake in the bank, is agitating for change, but according to Staley, has not set out a vision for doing so.
• "We are very comfortable with the trajectory of the bank, we think we’ve got, the support of our shareholders," Staley told CNBC at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.

Activist investor Edward Bramson has yet to lay out a vision for how he wants British lender Barclays to alter its strategy, despite taking a major stake and publicly agitating for change, according to the bank's CEO.

Speaking to CNBC on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Barclays boss Jes Staley said that while the bank had seen engagement with Bramson, the head of UK-based hedge fund Sherborne Investors, press reports about a grand plan for a change of strategy are wide of the mark.

"We’ve had a reasonable engagement with Bramson, over the last year, we’ll see him again in March. He really hasn’t laid out his strategy to us, you know, we read the press, and see what they say," Staley told CNBC.

"We are very comfortable with the trajectory of the bank, we think we’ve got, the support of our shareholders," he continued.

"We’ll engage with Bramson when he wants to, and exchange ideas, but for now, the bank, I think, is in a pretty good place, and the shareholders are pushing us forward."

Read more:Tensions are flaring between Barclays and a corporate raider, who's agitating to grab more control of the British bank

Sherborne Investors last year announced a more than 5% stake in the bank, with the clearly stated aim of moving Barclays away from a new reliance on investment banking.

Staley, who before joining Barclays was head of JPMorgan's investment bank, has made the investment bank the cornerstone of his turnaround strategy, while Bramson says it's a resource drain and wants cuts to the division.

Earlier in January, Bramson said he had lost confidence in his dealings with Barclays and was maneuvering to change the composition of the company's board of directors by taking a vote to shareholders, according toBloomberg.

"After considering the situation carefully, we do not have confidence that continued engagement with the company, strictly as an outsider, will produce any more measurable results in the future than it has to date," Bramson said.

Away from Bramson, Staley said that Barclays hopes to see more volatility in 2019, allowing for greater activity in financial markets.

"What you want is you want volatility, and you want liquidity, and you want activity by the buy side," he said.

"I think, this year, we will see a return to more normal levels of volatility, you know, 2017 was the lowest level of volatility in the history of the financial markets, 2018 had a couple of pops, very much towards the end of the year."

"I think we’re going to have a more normalised level of volatility, in fact that’s a positive thing for the intermediaries of the world’s capital markets."

SEE ALSO: Tensions are flaring between Barclays and a corporate raider, who's agitating to grab more control of the British bank

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The founder of the World Economic Forum shares what he sees as the biggest threat to the global economy

• Prosecutors in court on Thursday accused Barclays executives of using secret agreements in 2008 to pay Qatari investors fees that were more than double the rate other investors paid.
• The court saw evidence that one executive had speculated that without the agreement, the bank would have been "dead."
• The prosecution alleges that official prospectuses for capital raising during the financial crisis contained "false representations" signed off by key Barclays executives.
• The defendants, including the bank's former CEO John Varley and the coworkers Roger Jenkins, Thomas Kalaris, and Richard Boath, have all pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Barclays would have been "dead" without Qatari funding that is at the center of a trial over financial-crisis-era allegations involving former Barclays executives in London, Southwark Crown Court heard Thursday.

The court heard details of the negotiations between Barclays executives and Qatari investors. The bank would have been in a difficult position without Qatar's investment. Richard Boath, then the European head of Barclays' financial institutions group, said the bank would be "dead without it" in late May 2008.

Qatar had demanded higher fees to invest in the struggling bank. Barclays eventually paid the equivalent of 3.25% via separate agreements — more than double what other investors received. The existence of the extra fees was allegedly not disclosed.

Email correspondence indicated that executives were aware of likely "pressure on discount and fee" for the potential investment. "Without 1bn [£1 billion], at the very least, from Q[atar] we are basically dead" Boath said to his line manager, John Winter, in an email on May 28, 2008.

The Qatari tactics were also discussed by some of the executives. A message from former Barclays CEO John Varley to the bank's then-chairman, Marcus Agius, on May 25, 2008, said the Qataris were "playing hardball."

This was followed by an email sent by Tom Kalaris to Varley on May 28, which added that the Qataris were playing "frankly a little harder ball than either Roger or I expected."

"They've got us by the balls because the price is so low," said Robert Morrice, the chief executive of Barclays Asia, on June 3, 2008, in a call to Richard Boath.

The Qatari companies in question, Qatar Investment Authority and Qatar Holdings, invested £6 billion in Barclays during capital-raising activities in 2008.

Barclays paid £322 million in additional fees to the Qataris, according to Ed Brown, a prosecutor for the UK Serious Fraud Office. These fees came in the form of two separate "advisory services agreements," of £42 million and £280 million.

In a conversation regarding a draft subscription agreement, Kalaris said "None of us wants to go to jail here," to which Boath responded "it ain't worth it and apparently the food sucks." Kalaris then added: "No the food sucks and the sex is worse."

The trial at Southwark Crown Court is the first UK jury trial related to misconduct allegations from the financial crisis. The crisis threatened to collapse the global banking system, and several banks actually went under, including Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, and Northern Rock.

Other UK lenders were forced to take funding bailouts from the government to meet their capital ratios — the metric on which a bank's stability is judged. But former Barclays executives' activity in raising capital privately from Qatari investors was later investigated for alleged fraud.

The trial is ongoing.

SEE ALSO: Trial of former Barclays CEO whom prosecutors allege made 'dishonest' payments to Qataris during financial crisis begins in London

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What will happen when Earth's north and south poles flip

• Barclays executives were "rumbled" by Qatari investors during the bank's emergency fundraising in 2008, a conversation played in court Friday indicates.
• In their case against the executives over allegations related to the crises-era events, prosecutors said the bank created an internal memo designed to provide a misleading "audit trail."
• Alongside tough negotiations with Qatari investors, Barclays executives suggested they also had difficult negotiations with Chinese investors: "These Chinese are porking us," the court heard.
• The defendants, including the bank's former CEO John Varley and coworkers Roger Jenkins, Thomas Kalaris, and Richard Boath, have all pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Key Barclays executives were "rumbled" by their negotiations with Qatari investors during the bank's capital-raising exercise during the financial crisis, a Southwark Crown Court heard Friday.

It's week one of the case, in which the UK's Serious Fraud Office alleges that then-CEO John Varley and the three other defendants, Richard Boath, Thomas Kalaris, and Roger Jenkins, misled investors in fundraisings during the financial crisis by paying Qatari companies £322 million in secret fees that were not properly disclosed.

The defendants pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The prosecution alleges that Barclays executives were concerned about their dealings with the Qataris and made repeated references to spending time in jail, a continuation of recorded conversations that were played to the courtroom Thursday.

'Rumbled'

"There's obviously the jeopardy is that we're rumbled and people say well that was bulls---, you know, this is just a fee in the backdoor," said Boath, then the European head of Barclays' financial-institutions group, in a June 11, 2008, call to Kalaris, who headed the bank's wealth division at the time, that was played to the court.

The jury also heard Kalaris say, in the same call: "I don't want to go to jail."

Prosecutors also accused Barclays of creating an internal memo on June 13, 2008, about its dealings with Qatar that they said was designed to lay a misleading "audit trail."

The memo said the Qataris "would be content with the fees of 1.5% for their £2 billion commitment," something the prosecution said was misleading.

The court also heard a June 18, 2008, phone conversation between Boath and two senior lawyers at Barclays: Judith Shepherd and Matthew Dobson. During the call, Boath acknowledged deleting an email from Sheikh Hamad, then a potential Qatari investor, about extra fees.

In additional talks between Boath and Jenkins, formerly executive chairman of investment management for MENA at Barclays Capital, played to the court from later that June 2008 day, they discussed the possibility of reengaging other investors at a higher fee level so as to avoid paying the Qataris a higher fee than other investors.

"I think the best thing to do is, Chinese don't come in, we basically start again, we get the Chinese back at the table, 3% fees, Chinese come in, everybody comes in, we disclose 3% fees, we don't have any of this s---, none of us is going to be jailed," Boath said.

Varley, who was Barclays' CEO at the time, was mentioned as part of discussions centered on the bank's potential agreement with Qatar, which included the possibility of Sheikh Hamad, then the Qatari prime minister, providing advisory services.

"It's wrong of a prime minister to take a fee" for his advice to a bank, Jenkins said in another call played to the jury from June 18, 2008.

Jenkins added: "I'm very surprised that John Varley, given his ethics, is doing this."

Phone conversations between Shepherd and Boath on June 23, 2008, which were played to the court, discussed the terms between Barclays and Qatar in a proposed "advisory services agreement."

The Qataris were unhappy with the proposed wording, Boath said: "He doesn't like it, won't sign it, they're not having any of that crap in it."

Shepherd outlined that Sheikh Hamad would have to give the services in exchange for the fee because "otherwise you are going to end up in front of the Fraud Squad explaining why." To which Boath responded, "No, I've got a house in Brazil, there's no extradition treaty, I'm off."

The trial at Southwark Crown Court is ongoing and could last up to six months.

SEE ALSO: Internal Barclays messages said the bank would have been 'dead' if not for Qatari investors who had it 'by the balls,' prosecutors say

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This tiny building in Wilmington, Delaware is home to 300,000 businesses