| || |
| || || |
| || |
1. I think this is the key point most people like to oversee - and the average Blick reader is too stupid to get. I am not in finance and don't have the money to make risky bets. But if I was a trader and I really used the insider know how of the SNB... I would not simply buy a stash of dollars. There are WAY more risky/profitable products out there. If they really wanted to make some insder trades did they have the info, the opportunity and the skills to make millions. They didn't. To me it looks like the play money of an ex-trader-turned-housewive.
| || || |
What tabloid readers really like doing is SPECULATING on everything and anything except whats known as the facts. i.e. she could have done this, she could have done that therefore she is innocent etc etc.
What you suggest above implies CRIMINAL intent.
Nobody here is saying that she couldnt make more money had she so wished - thats not the issue. Actually we dont really know if other trades elsewhere/offshore where made either!! i.e. they could have also told a number of family members not directly related to either. But the court has already deemed the action as not illegal - so why bother speculating!
There was probably/possibly NOTHING untoward about her actions at all - i.e. she had no information and didnt intentionally buy US currency to make a trade on inside info period. The fact is NOBODY knows except for HER. But also nobody is naive enough to think that there isnt a slim chance of untoward actions either i.e. the almighty elitist belief that because its not illegal then it must also not be unethical which makes the person untouchable - and that IS THE POINT.
So lets stick to the facts we do know:
- Banking in itself is already at its lows in Switzerland.
- The Central bank have ALREADY been the centre of attention in the last decade and all for the wrong reasons.
- The job he has is incredibly sensitive - it affects inflows and outflows of funds in CH, it affects businesses, is fueling a property bubble at hotspots, it affects the money supply and affects the wealth of Swiss citizens.
- To put it simply - this persons decision/s can affect the wealth of Switzerland in the future i.e. can assist or damage CH economically - a point many seem to overlook.
- The position demands a lot of trust because it carries with it a lot of useful market information
- The actions of his wife were not illegal but they were definitely stupid and that stupidy has ruined her husbands trust among the swiss public.
If he would remain then each time the SNB would raise the EUR CHF exchange rate - we would all laugh, rolling, and in stitches. Hildebrand and his wife would be the butt of jokes next to every water fountain. Is this the sort of image the SNB should portray? An image that is already quite tainted? Probably NOT i would imagine.
His reputation in touching the swiss franc was over. A resignation would have been warranted with any central banker - and at least he had the guts to fall on his sword relatively quickly. I only wish the sword could have been the inflation that in my belief his actions on euro intervention will create (not for this thread though).
Your second point! Well thats PART 2 - the continuation of the Hildebrand saga. I'll just wait for the new Blick.