Even if it has written off all goodwill associated with the 2003 acquisition, HSBC is still far from being able to draw a line under Household. HSBC makes much of its “signature financial strength”. Indeed, it could absorb $30bn of losses and still retain a tier one capital ratio of 7.5 per cent. But that measure now carries little credibility. If it did, investors would have piled in to buy “well-capitalised” banks such as Citigroup. Investors are putting more focus on tangible common equity as an indicator of a bank's ability to survive without further capital and by this measure, HSBC is hardly the fortress of its own myth-making. Knight Vinke, the activist investor, estimates this ratio, now 2.8 per cent, could fall to below one per cent if these fair value adjustments materialise.
即使全額衝減了與2003年收購Household相關的商譽，滙豐仍遠不能與這項業務劃清界限。滙豐十分重視其「簽名的財務實力」。確實，它可以消化300億美元的虧損，同時保持7.5%的一級資本充足率。但這種措施如今不會帶來可信度。如果會的話，投資者早就去追捧花旗集團(Citigroup)等「資本雄厚的」銀行了。投資者現在更看重有形普通股權益，將之視爲衡量銀行在不進一步籌措資本情況下的生存能力的指標。按照這一指標，滙豐恐怕很難捍衛其自身創造的神話。股東維權人士奈特•溫科(Knight Vinke)估計，如果滙豐進行了公允價值調整報表，其普通股權益比率可能會從現在的2.8%降至1%以下。