Yeah, absolutely, it was a 'rogue trader' that caused us to lose all that money Herr Taxpayer. Honest, we're a bank and you can trust us.
Isn't it strange how 'rogue traders' never seem to make money? You'd think that the law of averages dictates that these handy scapegoats would make money as often as lose it but you never see headlines to the effect of 'Rogue Trader makes bank hundreds of millions of dollars, hailed as hero'.
The following 15 users would like to thank Gav for this useful post:
Yeah, absolutely, it was a 'rogue trader' that caused us to lose all that money Herr Taxpayer. Honest, we're a bank and you can trust us.
Isn't it strange how 'rogue traders' never seem to make money? You'd think that the law of averages dictates that these handy scapegoats would make money as often as lose it but you never see headlines to the effect of 'Rogue Trader makes bank hundreds of millions of dollars, hailed as hero'.
That's exactly how the Kerviel case went at Société Générale in Paris: as long as rogue trader makes money (illegaly) bosses cover to get their bonus. As soon as money is lost they react like "we didn't know".
The following 6 users would like to thank MrVertigo for this useful post:
Erm, there are now two threads on this topic, this one and the one I started about half an hour before it. (UBS loses US$2bn in rogue trading) Maybe a mod could combine them?
Cheers
Erm, there are now two threads on this topic, this one and the one I started about half an hour before it. (UBS loses US$2bn in rogue trading) Maybe a mod could combine them?
Cheers
In a statement the police said: "A 31-year old man was arrested at 3.30am in central London on suspicion of fraud by abuse of position. He remains in custody."
The trader's identity remains unclear although Swiss newspaper NZZ claimed he or she worked in the bank's equities division. The report said the loss had been discovered on Wednesday afternoon and was down to "a trader with substantial criminal energy". However, those claims remains unsubstantiated and some banking sources suggested equity losses on such a scale would be unlikely.
I'm not holding my breath that this means that all the other top bankers and traders around the world who cumulatively blew trillions of dollars are now going to face criminal investigation...
This user would like to thank Gav for this useful post:
Probably FX losses as a direct on SNB's intervention.
The law of unintended consequences strikes again ...
If that turns out to be the case, I guess that literally almost decimating the buying power of everyone's CHF savings and salary overnight wasn't an entirely consequence-less move by the authorities. Who'd have thunk it?
Linear Mode
