You would have to say that overall this article is a positive sign in terms of our survival chances.
After reversing the hysteria multiple currently applicable to all financial "journalism", the centrality of Griffiths' role in CBA's eventual agreement is probably a tenth of that which is being portrayed. I mean, Griffiths was there when the September extension was granted wasn't he? Or was he on annual leave at the time? There's probably fifty times more pressure on this decision than there was on the September one, inlcuding loads more scrutiny from the all-important pollies.
Griffiths is probably more of an power-tripping irritant than a real deal-breaker. But that wouldn't have made for a very exciting article would it?
As to the rest of the article, shouldn't we be rejoicing at the consensus of the other 22 lenders?
CNP Price at posting:
8.7¢ Sentiment: None Disclosure: Held
