Talk:Alliance & Leicester

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Companies Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles

Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Companies To-do:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Article requests : Wikipedia:Requested articles/Business and economics/Companies
Assess : Category:Unassessed company articles
Copyedit : Category:Company articles needing attention
Infobox : Category:Company articles needing infoboxes
Maintain : Portal:Companies
Stubs : Help expand stub articles located at Category:Company stubs
Other :
- Tag company articles with the {{portal|Companies}} template
- Tag company talk pages with the {{WikiProject Companies}} project banner
- Answer requests for comments

Girobank

A careful look at the public records of the old Girobank, their archives including their accounts for that period, show that A&L did not so much take over Girobank as they took over A&L. Girobank had just had a bumper year on its business banking side and was flush with cash, whereas A&L was in deep trouble because of a lot of bad debts from lending to businesses. The merger was arranged so Girobank's funds could keep A&L afloat. Harryf200 (talk) 22:18, 25 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Untitled

How can the Alliance and Leicester be formed in 1997 by the flotation of the former Alliance & Leicester? It may have changed it's status, but it existed long before 1997. Unfortunately, this Wikipedia page looks exactly like an advert, trying to hide or dissasociate itself from any former existance.

I think its OK to talk about its current plc status first and then its history but I agree with you to an extent. I am sure that could be better worded. Feel free to create a history section and remove the more egregious promotion if you think its there! There is no reason not to talk about the history of the Building Society here if you have information to add.I suspect the company has a history page somewhere on its web site. --Tom 18:08, 11 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at other articles about former building societies (Abbey, Halifax etc) they give the original founding date and not the date of demutualisation. I'm going to change it to be consistent with those other articles. MFlet1 (talk) 21:43, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merging or not?

The article currently contradicts itself. The opening section says

Alliance & Leicester will be rebranded as Santander by 2011 in line with other subsidiaries

while the history section says

the stated intention, at least at present, is to maintain the separate brands and to operate the two businesses as separate subsidiaries of the Santander group, whilst achieving back-office cost savings

The first statement has a citation needed tag against it, while the second has a reference which doesn't actually confirm the statement made. If anyone can find a statement of Santander's intent, maybe they could add it. Rojomoke (talk) 16:03, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have reworded the second section (which I added in the first place). The quote says: "and will mean that Abbey and Alliance & Leicester will merge in the slightly longer term." which does imply what I say it does ... that they will operate separately at first.

Whoever added the bit at the beginning has not provided any citation and I have not seen anything confirming what is claimed. That's why I added "citation needed". If nothing gets added in the near future I'll revert the change. MarkyMarkD (talk) 19:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alliance & Leicester. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081016082638/http://www.ftse.com/tech_notices/2008/Q4/20116_20081008_Alliance_%26_Leicester.jsp to http://www.ftse.com/tech_notices/2008/Q4/20116_20081008_Alliance_%26_Leicester.jsp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:39, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

savings account

I have an old Alliance and Leicester savings account how do i get a refund from Santander? 92.15.24.151 (talk) 13:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]