Hacker News Reader

Comment by ig1 | Hacker News Reader

In this case it's messy because DB problems are caused by a US government fine, a fine that realistically they wouldn't have imposed on a major US bank. So it's less about individual bank performance but rather international politics and trade barriers.

View on HN

Except the fine hasn't actually been imposed. The actual fine will be about half, or less, which will be in line with expectations.

Given the ECB is more or less committed to sub-zero interest rates for the next decade, the German government bond auction very recently failed, DB's and the German financial industries' reluctance to accept what started in 2007 has ended right at their door because of their inaction, and 10 years of absurd Mercantilism that has crushed 30% of the European economy, to say this latest round of catastrophe is because of a fine is myopic in the extreme.

DB has capital structure issues. The fine is only the proverbial nail in the coffin.

A fine that realistically they wouldn't have imposed on a major US bank.

Messy, indeed. But it's also a fine they wouldn't have had to worry about had their management not thumbed their noses at imposing adequate internal money laundering controls for a good chunk of a decade or so.

The US government would impose a fine, it would just be an inconsequential one. Like the one they imposed on Wells Fargo that was less than the CEO alone made partially due to the fraudulent accounts the employees set up.

"In a similar case, rival Goldman Sachs agreed in April to pay $5.06 billion to settle claims that it misled mortgage bond investors during the financial crisis." [1]

I don't know why the fine is lower, but it's the same order of magnitude...

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/16/deutsche-ba...

Thanks for the link,

though isn't it 5,1x10e0 vs 1,4x10e1 and doesn't that mean it's not the same order of magnitude (I might misunderstand the concept)?

Not to put too pedantic a spin on ballpark expressions, but the 5 rounds up to 10

I think you don't round up, both have 2 significant digits.

I may be seriously out of date, but "order of magnitude" was (c.1990s, and again, pedantically) the nearest power of 10. This is the way we taught it as well (those estimation problems in the first chapter of your physics text). Conversationally it was used more with a "wild ballpark" meaning. We would say "of the order of 3000" but strictly 3000 was of the order of 1000. 5000 was of the order of 10000. Etc.

Are they different by a factor of 10 or more? If not, then they're within an order of magnitude (base-10).

Thanks, this is my definition too!

Reply on news.ycombinator.com