Folgen Sie uns


Swiss Franc 1.20 Scandal – New Background Information




By Stefan Kasper-Behrs For three years the Swiss National bank avoided, by means of massive interventions at the currencies market, a revaluation of the Swiss Franc. On January 15th, 2015 this policy ended sending seismic waves around global financial markets. The Euro, for example, lost up to 30% of its trading value within a few minutes. Swiss equities freefell. Tens of thousands of investors lost their entire portfolios because they had trusted the assurances of the SNB. What did really happen on January 15th? The Swiss Franc 1.20 Scandal – new Background Information.

SNB Direktorium Wächter über den Schweizer Franken
Guards of the Swiss Franc: The Board of the Swiss National Bank. Foto: Swiss National Bank

Avoiding the Revaluation of the Swiss Franc

What is it all about? Switzerland is famed as the financial sanctuary. More and more investors bought into securities during the so called Greek Crisis or Euro Crisis by exchanging Euros and other currencies into Swiss Franc, as both the country and its currency are famed for being safe. The dramatic result of this understandable ripple effect: The Swiss Franc got stronger and stronger versus Euro, Pound and US Dollar. This trend lead to two problems. First: The Swiss industries lost competitiveness in tourism, agriculture, and others. Tourists come from surrounding countries and have to exchange their currencies (Euro) into Swiss Franc to purchase beverages, ski vouchers, and visits to restaurants. Due to the ever increasing exchange rate, their Euros bought less and less Swiss Franc. Their vacations became more expensive, the tourism numbers dwindled. Second: Switzerland has a remarkable and important exporting manufacturing industry. Foreign customers have to pay for their goods in Swiss Franc and those products get more and more expensive. Would they pay in Euros, for example, the Swiss exporter has to cover the exchange into Swiss Franc and obtains less for his products. Therefore the rising exchange rate of the Swiss Franc became a growing problem for the Swiss economy.

“Freezing” the Swiss Franc at 1.20

The SNB created the idea to “freeze” the exchange rate at 1.20 Swiss Franc per Euro. As all currencies are traded freely between banks the SNB had to virtually “print” amounts of Swiss Franc to buy Euros incase speculators would try to push the exchange rate below the mark of 1.20. The SNB purchased significant amounts of Euros using “printed” Swiss Franc over the past years. The Result: Foreign exchange currency reserves increased significantly and reached the mark of 500 Billion Swiss Franc. The SNB promised repeatedly and publicly (Video Press Conference) to continue its policy of supporting the 1.20 threshold (repeatedly mentioned as close as three days prior to its cancellation) even though they also stated that this policy was not made for eternity.

Here an Interview with the President of the SNB shortly before the Cancellation of the 1,20 Threshold. Funds managers, private investors, and speculators trusted this promise as they were trying to benefit from the Swiss Franc/Euro 1.20 threshold. Many investors still counted on the possibility of the SNB giving up their support and placed stop orders, despite the fact, that those stop orders might not all be fulfilled incase of a massive sell-off after the SNB cancelling their support.

Swiss Franc in Freefall

To most everyone’s surprise the SNB terminated its support for a 1.20 exchange rate on January 15th, 2015. A disaster for all of those who relied on the quote of SNB´s President Thomas J. Jordan (link3). This surprising announcement was emitted not on a weekend, but on a regular trading day during business hours. It had devastating results and financially ruined many customers of brokers and asset managers.

Euro vs Swiss Franc
This charts shows the price of Euro vs. Swiss Franc from December 2014 to May 2015, clearly shows the 1.20 threshold enforced by the SNB. Only minutes after publishing the SNB decision, the price dropped from 1.20 to 0.97 at the end of the day. A debacle for tens of thousands of Investors. The blame was put on bankers and brokers. A flock of lawyers who emerged as “specialists” in currency trading, disagreed the broker´s/bank´s requests against their clients who (after losing their complete balance) should make additional payments to the bank/broker. They might be successful when suing brokers and banks. Hardly any of those law firms focused on the real culprit, but suggested their clients come to terms with their debtors.

Negligence and Fraud?

From our point of view the SNB is not without guilt! Not because the SNB dropped the 1.20 threshold (Euro vs. Swiss Franc) as it is their duty as both a national bank as well as a publicly traded entity looking after the interests of state and investors. We are criticizing the when and how of their actions. One could assume that the SNB was misleading, but it would make little sense to pursue the matter legally. I have personally exchanged phone calls and emails with nice people at SNB throughout the last months and weeks of my research. I found details that almost seem incredible. Let’s review those item-by-item.

January 15th, 2015, 10:30h The SNB sends out emails at precisely 10:30 a.m. stating that the exchange rate support has been cancelled. I have checked my inbox and found that I have not received a SNB email. I, therefore, called the SNB and asked who had received these notifications. SNB’s ANSWER:

“Only the media on our mailing list have received our 10:30 a.m. communication,. It has not been sent to banks or other financial service providers.”

Not I ask to what media the email was sent to: SNB’s ANSWER:

“We do not want to send you a list of recipients of that email.”

Why would the SNB not give me the list of recipients? Who was inside the circle to receive this desirable message? I decided to do the job myself and find out when the major media had released the message.

Bloomberg 10:31:35
Reuters after 10:34
dpa-AFX after 10:34
Neue Zuericher Zeitung 11:40 h

According to my research the fastest agency was Bloomberg, they were able to publicize the news 1minutes 35 seconds after receipt. Professional traders in banks use Bloomberg or Reuters as rates and news providers. At Reuters, the person in charge overlooked the SNB email. Upon my request Reuters told me that they were “pretty shocked” that this had happened. Unfortunately, this mail account receives a thousand emails per day, this important SNB communication was simply missed. That is why Reuters published the message approximately 3 minutes after Bloomberg. Not a good mark for Reuters. Neither Reuters nor Bloomberg wanted to send me a copy of the email!

January 15th, 2015, 10:34:45 a.m. Let us look at a graph, the data is provided by the SNB and can be downloaded at the end of this report. Swiss Franc Revaluation 15.01.2015
Approx. 10 seconds before breaking the 1.20 threshold there is an increased sale activity. Did someone know what was about to happen? We can assume that Bloomberg was one of the fastest media companies in breaking the SNB news. Only 50 seconds after passing the 1.20 threshold, a lot of time in currency trading, Bloomberg spread the news. But already 30 seconds after 10:30 a.m. selling orders kept piling up. The SNB states to have emailed approximately 200 companies on their mailing list at precisely 10:30. The rate dropped below 1.20 for the first time at exactly 10:30:45 am. The SNB was very active in currency trading during previous years to provide exchange rate support. The important question now is … when did the SNB order their associated banks to stop buying at 1.20? Even if the order not to buy at 1.20 was given parallel to the email, one might suspect an advantage given to the associated banks. It is not known what banks processed SNB Swiss Franc buy orders, but one can reasonably assume that it was with the major Swiss banks. These banks assumedly have traders dedicated to the SNB.

Those traders would be the first ones to see the cancelled rate support. This advantage was probably worth “its weight in gold”. A few Facts: Deutsche Bank lost approx. 130 million Euro due to the currency market earthquake on January 15th, 2015. Citigroup lost a similar amount, Saxobank lost more than 100 Million US$. British CFD and Forex trader Alpari UK filed for bankruptcy. FXCM survived thanks to an injection of 300 Million US$. The British major bank Barclays is said to have suffered important losses. The list of banks and brokers suffering from losses is almost endless. Based on an estimate by Towers Watson consultants, 30 Billion Swiss Franc in pensions have been obliterated. My request to UBS inquiring about trading losses was answered with the following email: Dear Mr. Kasper-Behrs, Unfortunately, we do not publish the information requested by you. Thank you for your understanding. Best Regards. Credit Suisse answered along those lines. Due to the lack of information, I had to wait for the quarterly reports of some banks. UBS has ended first quarter of 2015 significantly better than expected and has thus surprised all analysts. A quarterly result of +1.977 Billion Swiss Franc was achieved.

Quarterly Profit of UBS in Swiss Francs
In Comparison, the bank (UBS) has produced 1 Billion Swiss Franc less in each first quarters of the years 2012 to 2015. The previous three quarters produced over 1 Billion Swiss Franc less compared to the first quarter of 2015. Analyzing the report further one could find that UBS increased their profits from FX, rates and credit, by a surprising 71%. Evil to him who thinks evil of it!

Why announce the news during active trading?

Why wasn’t the abandonment of the exchange rate support communicated on Saturday, January 17th, 2015? If so, all would have had an equal opportunity in the market. The US releases market info outside of trading times. The SNB board knew that the EZB (pursuant to a verdict by the European Council (EGH) dated January 14, 2015) (LINK 4) was able to purchase government bonds. The board expected that to happen shortly. The SNB seemed to have feared to have to engage into even more interventions to be able to maintain the 1.20 exchange rate. And evidently, on January 22nd, 2015, EZB’s Mario Draghi announced the purchase of government bonds valued at hundreds of billions Euro. The purchase of this value could not have been decided by the ECB in a matter of one week! This decision, as well as the date for publicizing the decision, have surely been determined before. It was known that the EGH would announce its verdict on January 14th, 2015. It is plausible that Mr. Jordan spoke with Mr. Draghi beforehand. He learned that one week after the EGH verdict that the EZB had planned to purchase European goverment bonds of incredible value. It could very well be that Mr. Jordan knew about those plans. Possibly, the SNB had planned to abandon the support of the Swiss Franc at 1.20 incase of a positive verdict much earlier. That would mean, however, that SNB’s vows of January 13th, 2015 (to maintain the exchange rate at 1.20) have mislead their citizens, investors, and banks. Mr. Jordan gave the following statement. “The timing of our decision is not related to the EGH verdict, that was a coincidence.”

A Clean Cut

The SNB wants to project the impression that the decision to end the support had been made in haste. I cannot believe that completely. A case of negligence and fraud? Or even worse? That is according to the individual observer of the situation on January 15th. It is a fact though that tens of thousands of investors around the world have lost a whole lot of money due to this specific situation in the Swiss Franc, both in equity/stock and currencies. Publishing the decision on a Saturday, with closed markets worldwide, would have been fair and transparent for all involved. Now we have brokers and clients fighting over whose Stop came when, why and how late or why it did not work at all.

Objectivity instead of Panic?

This is my opinion: Had the decision to end the 1.20 support have been communicated on a Saturday, the objectivity of the market on Monday, based on the time distance would have been much better. What do I mean by that? In the past 15 years of stock trading we have come across events that pummeled the trading community considerably. It was PANIC more than the event itself that lead to worldwide stock exchange crashes. The human psychology always responds with PANIC to those events. It overreacts. If there would have been two additional weekend days to stomach the disappearance of the threshold, the drop would not have been as brutal as it was – instead of a decrease from 1.20 to 0.97, maybe the rate would only have reached 1.05 o5 1.10. The damage for all involved would have been less if there would have been time to prepare. Especially funds and banks would have been able to consult and prepare for the situation-at-hand. But, maybe only a small circle was involved on purpose? We shall not forget that the wife of the predecessor of today’s SNB boss had conducted FX transactions in August of 2011 (US$ – Swiss Franc Exchange). Only due to pressure from the public media, the SNB announced on January 12th, 2012 the immediate resignation of it’s boss Mr. Hildebrand. We learned about those transactions only because of data stolen from (their) bank, Bank Sarasin, that were made public. In January of 2012, the SNB committee had an audit of their accounts conducted only to conclude that no infraction had been committed. She must have just been a great trader! The public learned on May 20th, 2015 that an ECB director had made statements during a reception in London on May 18th, 2015 about ECB’s plan to increase their bonds purchases in summer due to reduced liquidity in that period. The attending other bankers might have, allegedly, benefited from this information right then. The rest of the market members only learned about this plan the following morning. These events make me think about the FIFA somehow, I wouldn’t know why … ?

A Lawyer’s Opinion

These two previous examples are, of course, in no way related to the “Swiss Franc Subject” of January 15th, 2015, but do show that national banks do not always behave a serious and proper as one might think.What legal options might an investor have? I have discussed this subject with renown bank law expert and lawyer, Prof. Dr. Klaus F. Broeker. He has asked me to clearly state that the following is merely a quick synopsis and far from an official expert report. It is based solely on my input without verifying if complete, accurate, and in its entirety. It reflects his current legal opinion and does not include any warranty as to its correctness or completeness. He is voicing an opinion. Remarks about a possible liability of SNB in conjunction with the events on January 15th, 2015 (Swiss Franc) by Prof Dr. Broeker:

SNB as a possible defendant? 1) Based on possible infringement of contractual obligation: Claimants may only be such entireties that have a direct contractual relationship with SNB, as only an infringement of a right stemming from such contract may result in a liability of SNB. If SNB is acting like a common law entity and even into a contract as such common law entity (as opposed to a public entity), then basically there is a ground for a liability claim against SNB. The requirements for such claim in an overview: Contract SNB acting as common law entity Breach of contractual obligation by SNB Causality between breach of contract and damages Cause to protect contractual partner Conclusion: Breach of such contractual obligations seems unlikely. Possibly claimants may be corporations or persons suffering from financial losses due to the January 15th, 2015 events. It is questionable if there were individual or numerous acts by SNB or one of its employees/board members related to the abandonment of the Euro support that are cause for liability. Only then could these result in indemnifications. Changes in FX policies or the abandonment of the Euro support despite of opposing previous declarations are not suitable to support the claim.

It is, after all, the duty of the national bank to monitor the markets constantly and to make corresponding decisions concerning monetary stability. In case of SNB or one of their employees giving privileged preferential information to certain market members, for example, about no longer supporting the 1.20 exchange rate, that might possibly be legally problematic. Abandoning the Euro support during regular trading hours might be a possible cause for legal investigation. Such an announcement outside of regular trading hours could have caused less of a market aggravation. All market members would have had the same level of information at opening markets. One could think of regarding this analogy to an “Ad hoc” announcement according to Par. 15 Abs. 1, WpHG. This rule calls for immediate release of such important information if it does not cause misinformation of the public, not being the case here. Furthermore, these regulations are irrelevant in accordance with Par.1 Abs. 3, WpHG. In theory, it might be possible that there were certain activities causing suspicion of a market manipulation according to Par. 20 a, WpHG. Per Par. 20a Abs 4 No. 3, WpHG foreign currencies are regarded as objects that fall under the regulations of Par. 20a, WpHG. On the other hand, regulations according to Par.1 Abs. 3, WpHG apply. Where an intervention by national banks in favor of certain currencies made due to monetary policies are exempt of Par. 20 a, WpHG. The SNB will use the above reasoning and is therefore exempt. As long as there is no court relevant evidence of an intentional act with self-enriching components against protective regulations, no liability claims can be made. Evident of such kind could only be internal email exchange or written remarks of SNB employees with third parties. This seems to be farfetched. In conclusion: Based on current information civil claims again SNB regarding the events from January 15th, 2015 do not seem feasible.


Only a Whistleblower could possibly unearth a preferential treatment by SNB of corporations, banks, or individuals. Such information, if existing at all, could become pretty expensive for SNB. Dear Whistle Blower, send us your message at:

In closing, I would like to use this quote: An imposter is someone who scams others without having the legal right to do so!
© Prof. Querulix (*1946), german deutscher aphorist and satirist.

Download of SNB Data.

Remark: Mr. Broeker´s Comments for the possible accountability of the SNB are no legal advice.

Hier klicken und kommentieren

Hinterlassen Sie eine Antwort

Ihre E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert.

ACHTUNG: Wenn Sie den Kommentar abschicken stimmen Sie der Speicherung Ihrer Daten zur Verwendung der Kommentarfunktion zu.
Weitere Information finden Sie in unserer Zur Datenschutzerklärung


Dax-Wochenausblick: Test der 1.000 Punkte Range – folgt bald der Ausbruch?

Stefan Jäger



Im folgenden Video bespricht Marius Schweitz von Projekt30 die abgelaufene Woche im Dax und gibt einen ausführlichen Ausblick auf die kommende Handelswoche. Dabei geht er konkret auf die übergeordnet Seitwärtsrange ein und zeigt mögliche Szenarien auf, wie sich die ausgebildete 1.000 Punkte Range auflösen könnte. Im deutschen Leitindex haben sich sehr spannende Chart-Formationen herauskristallisiert, die auf eine große Bewegung hindeuten. In dem Video sehen Sie aber nicht nur einen Dax-Ausblick, sondern auch noch weitere Einschätzungen zum Dow Jones, Bitcoin, Gold, Euro, Softbank und Deutsche Bank.

Die Setiwärtsrange im Dax von Juli bis Oktober

Im März startete die rasante Corona-Rally, die viele Anleger als die „meistgehasste Rally aller Zeiten“ betiteln, aber seit ein paar Monaten ist sie ins Stocken geraten. Zwischen März und Juli kannte der deutsche Leitindex im Grunde nur eine Richtung – nämlich gen Norden. Im Juli hat der Anstieg aber erstmals ein abruptes Ende gefunden, nachdem der Dax das Hoch bei 13.315 Punkten erzielt hatte. Seitdem konnte er diesen Bereich nur zweimal wieder erreichen. Zum einen am 03.09. mit dem Hoch bei 13.460 und schließlich noch einmal am 14.09. bei 13.339.

Demgegenüber stehen zusammen mit dem Tief vom letzten Donnerstag drei Marken, die die Unterkante der Range bilden. Die drei Punkte setzen sich aus dem August-Tief (03.08.) bei 12.365, dem September-Tief (25.09.) bei 12.341 und schließlich dem Oktober-Tief (22.10.) bei 12.345 zusammen. Aus diesen drei Marken hat sich ein starker Unterstützungsbereich gebildet. Als zusätzliche Unterstützung kann man noch das Tief von Anfang Juli bei 12.254 hinzuzählen. Ein Bruch der Range-Unterkante dürfte folglich einem kräftigen Impuls auf der Unterseite auslösen. Erfahrungsgemäß wird die gleiche Höhe der Range in die entsprechende Richtung abgearbeitet. Angenommen, dass der Ausbruch im Dax auf der Oberseite gelingt, dann ergibt sich daraus ein Ziel bei 14.340 Punkten. Dementgegen liegt das Ziel bei einem Ausbruch auf der Unterseite bei 11.340 Punkten.

Dax-Wochen-Ausblick KW44 - 1.000 Punkte Seitwärtsrange von Juli bis Oktober

Aktuelle Chart-Fomationen im Dax

Auf verschiedenen Zeitebenen haben sich im Dax interessante Chart-Formationen entwickelt. Zum einen hat sich im 10-Minuten-Chart ein Descending Broadening Wedge (DBW) ausgebildet, das eine bullische Formation darstellt. Im Stundenchart ist zudem ein großes DBW-Wedge aktiv, das bei einer Auflösung hohe Ziele auf der Oberseite ermöglicht. Auf der bärischen Seite sehen wir außerdem noch eine aktive Wolfe Wave (Keil), die den bärischen Trigger bei 12.341 auslösen könnte. Dadurch würden sich Kurse unter der 12.000 Punkte-Marke ergeben. Auf Tagesbasis hat sich zwischen Juli und Oktober zusätzlich eine SKS gebildet. Sowohl die genannten Formationen, als auch die wichtigen charttechnischen Marken für die kommende Woche werden ausführlich und für jeden verständlich im Video erläutert.


Der Dax steht vor einer ausschlaggebenden Richtungsentscheidung, diese kann eine Bewegung von mehr als 1.000 Punkten einleiten. In dem Video-Ausblick wird ausführlich auf die möglichen Szenarien eingegangen. Insbesondere die von Marius Schweitz herausgearbeiteten Chart-Formationen sind sehr sehenswert und zeigen die Möglichkeiten auf, wie es im Dax in der nächsten Woche und darüber hinaus weitergehen kann. Zudem erscheint für alle Leser und Leserinnen von Finanzmarktwelt ab Montag wie gewohnt der DAX daily. Viel Spaß beim schauen des Videos.



Banken: Es hagelt sensationell gute Quartalsergebnisse!

Claudio Kummerfeld



Hochhäuser von Banken im Londoner Viertel Canary Wharf

Was ist das los? Gerade in der schlimmsten Rezession seit Jahrzehnten sollten sich die Banken doch in einer dramatischen Schieflage befinden? Denn Kreditausfälle müssten aus Quartalsgewinnen eigentlich Verluste machen und damit folglich das Eigenkapital der Banken angreifen? Dieses Szenario steht womöglich bevor, wenn die anstehende Pleitewelle Löcher in die Bücher der Banken reißt.

Aber noch ist es nicht soweit. Derzeit hagelt es sensationell gute Quartalszahlen von Banken weltweit. Vor allem fällt auf, dass gerade die Banken tolle Zahlen melden, die stark im Kapitalmarktgeschäft tätig sind, und eher weniger im Privat- und Firmenkundengeschäft mit Krediten, wo Probleme mit Kreditausfällen drohen, und wo die Banken sich derzeit mehr denn je mühen neue Kundeneinlagen abzuweisen – weil sie selbst sonst Strafzinsen zum Beispiel bei der EZB entrichten müssten.

Banken mit starkem Kapitalmarktgeschäft im Vorteil

Wie gesagt. Wer stark im Kapitalmarktsegment engagiert ist, der feiert die Krise. Zum Beispiel lässt sich derzeit viel Geld machen mit den globalen Schuldenorgien. Wo die Banken zum Beispiel in Europa in den Erstauktionen der staatlichen Schuldenagenturen Staatsanleihen aufkaufen, können sie mutmaßlich schön und entspannt Gewinn machen mit dem Weiterverkauf der Anleihen an die EZB am Sekundärmarkt. Auch in vielen anderen Bereichen des Kapitalmarkts war die letzten Quartale viel los. Man beachte in diesem Zusammenhang die sensationell guten Quartalszahlen von Goldman Sachs vom 14. Oktober. Der Quartalsgewinn konnte gegenüber dem Vorjahresquartal verdoppelt werden (hier die Details). Bei den anderen großen US-Banken gab es keine Katastrophen-Meldungen. Und dann am Dienstag dieser Woche meldete die Schweizer Großbank UBS ebenfalls eine Gewinn-Verdoppelung (hier die Details).


Heute nun hat die britische Großbank Barclays ihre Quartalszahlen veröffentlicht. Der Gewinn liegt mit 611 Millionen Pfund gut drei Mal so hoch wie erwartet, und auch dramatisch besser als im Vorjahr. Da war es noch ein Verlust von 292 Millionen Pfund – auch wenn man hier berücksichtigen muss, dass der Verlust aufgrund von Schadenersatzzahlungen an geschädigte Kreditnehmer zustande kam. Dennoch ist heute ein Gewinn, der drei Mal so hoch reinkommt wie erwartet, beachtlich. Außerdem hat Barclays wie viele andere Banken auch im dritten Quartal die Risikovorsorge für mögliche Kreditausfälle deutlich reduziert, nämlich auf 608 Millionen Pfund nach 3,7 Milliarden Pfund in den ersten sechs Monaten des Jahres.


Bei der größten skandinavischen Bank Nordea könnte man glatt meinen, dass die Krise zeitlich auf den Kopf gestellt wurde. Auch hier gab es heute Quartalszahlen. Der operative Gewinn steigt binnen Jahresfrist von 875 Millionen auf 1,09 Milliarden Euro. Die Gründe für die guten Zahlen: Einerseits mehr Kreditvergabe-Volumen in der Krise – andererseits nicht mehr vorhandene Belastungen durch Schrottkredite (331 Millionen Euro Belastung im Vorjahresquartal). Dennoch erwartet Nordea für das Gesamtjahr Kreditausfälle von gut einer Milliarde Euro. Es klingt wie ein Witz, dass jetzt Belastungen durch Kreditausfälle weggefallen sind. Aber aktuell wirkt es noch schlüssig. Es werden weltweit auch mit Staatshilfen viele neue Kredite vergeben, wo die Kreditnehmer natürlich erstmal wieder liquide sind und auch die monatlichen Raten einige Zeit lang zahlen können.

Noch sieht es gut aus

Wenn die große Pleitewelle bei Unternehmen denn kommen sollte, dürfte sich die Lage für die Banken verdunkeln. Banken wie Goldman Sachs mit fast null klassischem Privatkundengeschäft könnten auch in einer Pleitewelle gut da stehen, weil man ja keine Kreditausfälle verkraften müsste. Und die deutschen Banken? Die Commerzbank meldet ihre Quartalszahlen am 5. November, die Deutsche Bank am 28. Oktober. Es ist möglich, dass sie schon vorab als Ad Hoc-Meldung ihre Finanzdaten berichten, wenn sie zu stark von den Erwartungen abweichen. Es könnte sein, dass auch die beiden deutschen Großbanken jetzt halbwegs akzeptable Zahlen melden, und dass die bitteren Verluste der Kreditausfälle erst noch anstehen, wenn die Pleitewelle wie von vielen Experten erwartet demnächst einsetzt. Aber es kann vielleicht noch einige Zeit dauern, bis eine Pleitewelle wirklich auf die Quartalszahlen der Banken durchschlägt. Denn bis die Bank wirklich einen Kredit als Verlust abschreibt, muss erstmal der Schuldner den Bach runtergehen, dann gibt es Verhandlungen über Umschuldungen usw. Also, kurzfristig könnten auch Deutsche Bank und Commerzbank noch akzeptable Quartalszahlen melden.



Markus Koch LIVE vor dem Handelsstart in New York – Value-Werte auf der Überholspur





Markus Koch meldet sich im folgenden Video LIVE vor dem Handelsstart in New York. Es gibt gute Konjunkturindikatoren aus Deutschland und Asien. Laut Markus Koch sind die Value-Werte jetzt auf der Überholspur.



Meist gelesen 7 Tage

Wenn Sie diese Webseite weiter verwenden, stimmen Sie automatisch der Verwendung von Cookies zu. Zur Datenschutzerklärung

Die Cookie-Einstellungen auf dieser Website sind auf "Cookies zulassen" eingestellt, um Ihnen das beste Surferlebnis zu ermöglichen. Wenn Sie diese Website ohne Änderung Ihrer Cookie-Einstellungen verwenden oder auf "Akzeptieren" klicken, erklären Sie sich damit einverstanden.