FINO ALLA SEPARAZIONE LA COREA DEL NORD ERA PIÙ SVILUPPATA DI QUELLA DEL SUD, POI È ARRIVATO IL REGIME DEI KIM

E OGGI PYONGYANG È IN FONDO A TUTTE LE CLASSIFICHE GLOBALI SULLA QUALITÀ DELLA VITA  GRAZIE AL CAPITALISMO SEUL È 352 VOLTE PIÙ RICCA DI 60 ANNI FA, MENTRE DALL’ALTRA PARTE DEL 38° PARALLELO LE PERSONE MUOIONO DI FAME (TRANNE KIM) …

Mauro Frasca per Libero Quotidiano

KIM JONG UN E MOON JAE IN

Si incontrano oggi il presidente sud-coreano Moon Jae-in e il «comandante supremo» del Nord, Kim Jong-un. È il primo vertice intercoreano che non si svolge a Pyongyang ma in territorio sudcoreano: in una sala conferenze al secondo piano della Casa della pace di Panmunjeom. Ed è un faccia a faccia in cui ovviamente il mondo spera per spazzare via i foschi scenari di guerra nucleare che aleggiano sulla penisola coreana negli ultimi anni, ma che mette anche a drammatico confronto un Paese che è stato diviso nella scelta tra capitalismo e comunismo. Con risultati impressionanti.

KIM JONG UN

Vediamo ad esempio le componenti di quell'indice di sviluppo umano che fu inventato nel 1990 e che è utilizzato dall' Onu fin dal 1993 per valutare la qualità della vita nei Paesi membri. Una cosa che va premessa è che al momento della separazione era il Nord la parte più sviluppata della penisola, rispetto al Sud. Nel 1945 il 65% dell'industria pesante stava al Nord, anche se in compenso il Sud aveva il 69% dell'industria leggera, il 63% dell'agricoltura e l'81% del commercio. La guerra del 1950-53 aveva ridotto entrambi i territori a un deserto devastato, ma grazie agli ingenti aiuti dati da Mosca e da Pechino per la ricostruzione negli anni '50 la crescita del Nord arrivò a livelli impressionati da 30% l'anno.

KIM IL SUNG PROPAGANDA

Solo dal 1965 la crescita del Sud iniziò a superare quella del Nord, e ancora fino all'inizio degli anni '70 il Nord aveva un reddito pro-capite più alto. Ma già nel 1979 il reddito pro capite del Sud era diventato il triplo del Nord.

Dai 79 dollari pro capite del 1960, un livello da Africa sub-sahariana, la Corea del Sud nel 2017 era cresciuta a 29.891: 27esima tra le 187 economie considerate dalla stima del Fmi. L' Italia era 25esima, ma la previsione ricavata dagli stessi dati del Fmi è che entro la fine di quest' anno i sud-coreani dovrebbero superarci.

42 VOLTE PIÙ RICCHI

KIM JONG UN 

La Corea del Nord sta fuori da questa classifica, così come sta fuori quella della Banca Mondiale. Sta invece in quella delle Nazioni Unite del 2016, dove i Paesi considerati sono 193. Lì la Corea del Sud è al posto numero 30: 27.785 dollari. La Corea del Nord al posto numero 176: 665. Cioè, seguendo il capitalismo invece del comunismo, i sud-coreani sono diventati 352 volte più ricchi di quanto non fossero all' inizio del percorso, e 42 volte più ricchi dei nord-coreani. Ovvia l'obiezione: non si può paragonare il potere di acquisto di Paesi diversi. Infatti Fmi e Banca Mondiale fanno anche una stima a parità di potere d'acquisto, ma anche lì la Corea del Nord non è presente.

KIM JONG UN 

Poiché l'Onu non fa questo calcolo, bisogna allora servirsi di una stima della Cia, secondo cui la Corea del Sud nel 2017 era 33esima su 198 economie esaminate, con 39.400 dollari equivalenti pro capite. La Corea del Nord era invece 184esima, con 1700. Comunque, i sud-coreani restano 20 volte più ricchi.

Ma i soldi non sono tutto, è l' altra possibile obiezione. Per questo è stato infatti inventato il già citato Indice di Sviluppo Umano. E pure sotto questo punto di vista la Corea del Sud sta piazzata molto meglio che come reddito pro-capite: nel 2016 18esima su 188, con indice 0,901. Meglio di noi, che siamo 26esimi con 0,887. Anche qui, la Corea del Nord stava fuori classifica. Bisogna ricorrere a una stima alternativa per ricavarne un indice da 0,564, che corrisponde a un 195esimo posto.

COREA DEL NORD 

Questo significa ad esempio che un sud-coreano può aspettarsi di vivere in media 12 anni in più di un nord-coreano. Su 183 Paesi, la Corea del Sud era infatti nel 2015 undicesima, con una aspettativa di vita da alla nascita da 82,16. In Italia siamo sesti, con 82,7. In Corea del Nord sono 109esimi, con 70,34.

Anche come Indice di Istruzione nel 2012 la Corea del Sud era undicesima: 0,865. Incomparabilmente meglio del nostro 33esimo posto, a 0,790. Ma, di nuovo, la Corea del Nord stava fuori classifica. E qui nessuno si è neanche azzardato a fare il calcolo alternativo. Ricordiamo che il Niger, ultimo tra i Paesi stimati, è a 0,198.

LA FAME

BAMBINI NORDCOREANI

C' è pure un Indice Globale della Fame, non stimato dall' Onu ma dall' International Food Policy Research Institute. Secondo quest' alttro strumento la Corea del Nord è 93esima su 110 Paesi considerati. In compenso, qui è la Corea del Sud che sta fuori classifica. Da ricordare che mentre nel 1998 il padre di Kim Jon-un spendeva 100 milioni di dollari per festeggiare il suo compleanno, i nord-coreani morivano di fame come mosche: 250.000 per le ammissioni ufficiali; vari milioni secondo i calcoli di varie ong.

COREA DEL NORD 

Stima media, 2-2,1 milioni di morti. Poi la situazione si è un po' ristabilita, ma secondo la Fao nel 2006-08 i sud-coreani erano stati al 51esimo posto al mondo come consumo di calorie giornaliero pro-capite: 3040. Un terzo in più dei nord-coreani, 155esimi su 172 Paesi considerati con 2110.

COREA DEL NORD 

Un effetto di questa differenza di nutrizione si vede nell'altezza media. Secondo le cifre ufficiali, in Corea del Sud la statura media tra i 19enni nel 2012 era di 178 cm. per i maschi e di 160 per le femmine; in Corea del Nord sempre tra i 19enni era di 1,72 per i maschi e 1,59 per le femmine. Ma le cifre calcolate sui nord-coreani fuggiaschi davano addirittura una media di 1,65 per gli uomini e di 1,54 per le donne.

Fonte: qui

The Crash Of 1929: "Can It Happen Again?"

In the 4^th of February, we published a blog entry detailing the similarities of the current stock market environment with that before the stock market crash in 1987. On February 5^th, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) experienced the worst daily point decline of its history. Since then, the stock market has recovered, but are we out of the woods?

At the aforementioned entry, we also warned that the situation in the global economy actually resembles more of the time before the Great Depression than that before of the Black Monday in 1987. Worryingly, the same holds for the US equity markets. In fact, almost all of the developments that led to the Great Crash of 1929 are already visible in the US. We may thus be heading towards the worst asset market crash in 90 years.

Prequisites: The ‘Roaring Twenties’

The 1929 crash marked the end of the ‘Roaring Twenties’. The era got its name from consumer and stock market booms driven by the automobile and building sectors. The gold standard and the neutralization of all gold purchases from abroad by the newly created central bank, Federal Reserve or Fed, controlled the consumer price inflation. Due to low inflation, Fed had only limited incentives to intervene on the speculation by increasing the short-term interest rates. The easy credit era was let to persist fueling the boom in the consumer durables, commercial property market, automobile industry and the stock markets.

The tide switched in January 1928. The Fed decided that the boom had gone far enough and started to raise its discount rate and sell its holdings of government securities in effort to stem the speculation. But, rising money market rates made the brokers’ loans viable options for the bank loans because the former were mostly funded by the large balance sheets of corporations. The call loan rates were also clearly higher than the Fed discount rate, which meant that banks were able to borrow cheaply from the Fed and earn a nice margin on loans to investors. The higher interest rates set by Fed thus increased both the bank and non-bank funds available for stock market speculation. Contrary to the aim of the Fed, the financial conditions eased further and the speculation increased. The twenties kept on roaring.

The Great Crash

In 4 December 1928, President Coolidge had given a reassuring State of the Union speech and 1929 started with positive expectations. The stock market kept rising and the consumer boom continued. It was a common belief that earnings and dividends are growing because of the systematic industrial application of the science together with the development of modern management technologies and business mergers. Still, the first half of 1929 was marked with increasing volatility.

By the summer a dubious mood started to creep. The dividend growth was solid but the economy started to look mature. The first hints about the approaching recession arrived in July 1929 as the index of the industrial production of the Fed diminished. Mixed news and rising interest rates in the US and abroad warned of a looming recession. In September, the stock market started to drift downwards. The fear of a recession started to set in.

On Thursday October 24, after a turbulent week, the prices hovered for all while at the start, but then fell rapidly and the stock ticker started to lag behind. The prices kept falling and the ticker fell further behind. The pace of the sell orders grew at an increasing rate and by eleven o’clock a ferocious selling had gripped the market. A few selected quotations given by the bond ticker showed that the that the current values were far below the now seriously lagging tape. Margin calls started to roll in and many investors were forced to liquidate their stock holdings. The increasing uncertainty made the investors even more scared and by eleven-thirty there was a sheer panic. The frenzy of selling could even be heard outside the New York Stock Exchange, where crowds gathered.

At noon, the reporters learned that several notable bankers had gathered at the office of the J.P. Morgan & Company. At one thirty, the vice-president of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), Richard Whitney, appeared on the trading floor and started to make large purchases of variety of stocks (starting from the Steel post). This had a clear message: the bankers had stepped in. The effect was imminent. The fear eased and the stocks rallied.

On Friday, the volume of trading was large, but the prices held up. During the weekend, there was a sense of relief. The disaster had been avoided and the actions of the bankers were celebrated. But then came Monday.

On Monday, October 28, the market opened to uneasy tranquility which was quickly broken. The selling started, then accelerated, and by noon the market was in a full panic mode. The bankers gathered again but the savior was never seen on the floor. Heavy selling continued throughout the day, and the market melted down, with the DJIA closing down by almost 13 percentage points for the day. After the close, there was not a word from the bankers or from anyone else, for that matter. During the night, a panic spread through the nation.

On Tuesday, October 29, the selling orders flooded the NYSE in the open. The prices plunged right from the start, feeding the panic. The sell orders from all over the country overwhelmed the ticker and sometimes even the traders. During the day, massive blocks of stocks were sold indicating that the ”big players” (banks, investment funds etc.) were liquidating. During the worst selling periods, there was a countless number of the selling orders but no buyers. This meant that, at times, the markets were in a complete free fall. There was a brief rally before the end of trading but despite this, the ”Black Tuesday” was one of the most brutal days at the NYSE with the DJIA falling by 11 % with heavy volumes.  Within a week, DJIA had lost 29 % of its value.

The daily closing values of Dow Jones Industrial Average during the year 1929. Source: GnS Economics, MacroTrends

Are we in a time loop?

The crash of 1929 marked the end of a long stock market boom fed by several years of easy credit. Because inflation was low for most of the 1920’s, Fed did not bother to curb the speculation by rising rates and when it did, the rise was too little too late. The signals for an upcoming recession broke the highly over-valued stock market in 1929. Actually, for example the dividends grew even in the last quarter of 1929 but the faith for the future of the market was broken and the investors panicked.

Currently, we are in a situation where, according to several metrics, the stock market is the most over-valued in the history of the NYSE. The central banks, with their orthodox and unorthodox monetary policies, have fed the asset market mania for nine years now but, currently, they are in a tightening cycle. Moreover, the global economy is in a risk of a dramatic slowdown.

This indicates that the main components of the crash of 1929: an over-valued stock market, a central bank tightening cycle (higher interest rates) and a slowing economy are almost all present in the US. We will thus soon know how well the history rhymes.

The historical accounts are based on the “The Great Crash 1929“ by John K. Galbraith, “The stock market boom and crash of 1929 revisited” by Eugene White and on “Lessons from the 1930’s Great Depression” by Nicholas Crafts and Peter Fearon.

Submitted by GnS Economics

And... Yet Another Wells Fargo Banking Scandal

Is it Friday again? Must be time for another banking scandal!

Seriously– these banking scandals are happening with such regularity and predictability it would be almost comical. . . were it not for the millions of people who have had their lives turned upside down.

The latest transgression involves, once again, our old friends at Wells Fargo.

Bear in mind that the ink isn’t even dry yet on the $1 billion check that Wells Fargo wrote last week as a penalty to settle its previous scandal, where they defrauded 570,000 clients in a car insurance scam.

By the bank’s own estimates, as many as 20,000 of those clients may have had their vehicles repossessed as a result of their inability to pay for the car insurance that Wells Fargo illegally stuck them with.

And speaking of vehicle repossession, in November of last year Wells Fargo came under fire for illegally repossessing vehicles that were owned by members of the military.

In October, Wells Fargo took heat from federal regulators after it was found that the bank had deliberately recommended investment products that were “highly likely to lose value. . .” Early that month, the bank admitted that it had ‘erroneously’ charged late fees to more than 100,000 borrowers, even though the delays were the bank’s fault.

In 2016, a number of employees at various Wells Fargo branches in California were found to have sold sensitive customer information, including Social Security Numbers, to a ring of identity thieves.

And of course, in late 2016 and all throughout 2017, Wells Fargo’s notorious ‘fake account’ scandal was found to have affected millions of customers.

There’s a word for all of this: fraud.

And if you or I had committed any of these acts by even the slightest, we’d be wearing DayGlo Orange jumpsuits in a federal penitentiary.

But a grand total of ZERO executives from Wells Fargo have been sent to prison or faced any charges whatsoever.

In fact, the executive who was found to be the most culpable in the fake account scandal scored a whopping $67 million severance package when she left the company in late 2016.

And the new CEO (who took over after the fake account scandal in 2016) has been rewarded with a 35% pay increase even though both the stock price and the bank’s profits have languished.

Scandal #867,241 just hit the news yesterday afternoon: Wells Fargo is now being investigated by the United States Department of Labor. This time the bank is accused of deliberately pushing customers into more expensive, higher-fee retirement accounts– accounts that are bad for the customers, but more lucrative for the bank.

It just never stops with these people. And it’s not just Wells Fargo.

Nearly EVERY major bank in the world, from JP Morgan to Barclays, Citigroup, UBS, Bank of America, etc. has been found at some point or another over the last several years of grossly violating the public’s trust.

Yet we consumers still willingly let these criminals hold our money.

Month after month we deposit our paychecks and hold our savings in an institution that rarely misses an opportunity to prove that they cannot be trusted.

They’ve been caught manipulating asset prices, colluding to fix interest rates and exchange rates, and engaging in irresponsible lending practices that put our savings at risk for their sole benefit.

They treat customers with such contempt, scrutinizing even the most innocuous transactions as if WE are the criminals.

And when they screw it all up, gambling away our hard-earned savings on some idiotic investment fad, they go to the taxpayer with hat-in-hand claiming that they’re too important to go out of business… and then shower themselves with record bonuses.

Our reward for putting up with all of this abuse? Well, according to BankRate.com, interest rates at the biggest retail banks (Wells, Bank of America, Chase, etc.) average just 0.01%.

This banking system so pathetic.

Yet we’ve all been institutionalized, practically since birth, to believe that we HAVE to use it… that there’s no alternative.

And that used to be true several decades ago. But in 2018, there are countless alternatives.

Literally every single function of a bank can be performed better, faster, cheaper OUTSIDE of the banking system.

Rather than holding your savings in a bank, you can literally earn more than 150x as much interest with extremely short-term Treasury Bills. Or if you want, you can even hold physical cash.

For loans, there are dozens of websites where you can crowdfund a home loan or small business loan.

And for retirement accounts– the latest Wells Fargo transgression– you DEFINITELY don’t need a bank.

Retirement accounts are one of the biggest areas where banks and major financial institutions routinely bilk their customers out of useless and unnecessary fees.

Even if they’re not charging you a fee outright, they’re diverting your retirement savings into some fund that they control and taking a percentage or two away from what you should be earning.

And over a period of several decades (we’re talking about retirement after all), a single percent difference in your average investment return because of bank fees can add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

So it’s a pretty big deal.

The reality is there are SO many ways to properly structure your retirement in better, more robust, less expensive ways.

For example– if you qualify, a solo 401(k) is an extraordinary retirement structure that’s cheap to administer and incredibly flexible.

With a solo 401(k), you can contribute tens of thousand of dollars each year to your retirement, as well as invest in a variety of assets that are not available to traditional plans (like real estate and private equity).

And you can even borrow money directly from your retirement plan under certain circumstances.

Self-directed IRAs are also great structures with similar benefits, though they have slightly higher costs and less flexibility.

Bottom line, there are plenty of options on the table to distance yourself from this abuse.

Submitted by Simon Black of Sovereign Man

America’s Silent $6,000,000,000,000 Crisis With No Solution In Sight

“From Portland to Portland, Lake Superior to the Mexican gulf…American pensions are wrecked upon the rocks of actuarial fact.” 

by Brian Maher via Daily Reckoning

America’s silent crisis is no longer… silent.

MarketWatch columnist Jeff Reeves has warned that “collapsing pensions will fuel America’s next financial crisis.”

“This is not a distant concern,” he adds, “but a system already in crisis.”

By some estimates, America’s public pensions alone are sunk in a $6 trillion abyss.

According to the Federal Reserve, pensions — public and private combined — were roughly 27% underfunded as of last year.

Meantime, vast hordes of pensioners are entering or approaching retirement.

Come at the dilemma from any angle… and you come upon a labyrinth.

How has the American pension come to such a sad pass?

As far as public pensions run, the answer is close by.

Daily Reckoning contributor Charles Hugh Smith:

Corrupt politicos promised the moon to public employees, and now the fiscal chickens of insolvency are coming home to roost.

“But I don’t have a pension,” comes your response. “This doesn’t concern me.”

Ah, but have another guess — at least if you swear off your taxes in these United States.

As the late Canadian Prime Minister Mackenzie King styled it:

“The politician’s promises of yesterday are the taxes of today.”

Zero Hedge’s pseudonymous Tyler Durden:

Funds collected from taxpaying Americans will be spent to satisfy the ridiculous retirement promises and obligations made over the past few decades, and while the immediate recipients of the funds, i.e., those looking at near-term retirement, will be made whole, everyone else, i.e., taxpayers, will lose.

Just so.

It is an iron law of nature, second only perhaps to gravity:

Politicians promise… taxpayers pay.

And let us add our own corollary:

The better the politician… the bigger the promises… and the larger the bill.

Most public pension systems were built upon this rosy-dawn assumption:

Their investments would yield a handsome 7.5% annual return.

Once upon a time, that may have been realistic.

But that was before the 2008 financial crisis… before the Federal Reserve opened its war on savers… and bonds still paid a handsome yield.

Consider…

The average public pension plan worked an average gain of 2–4% by 2015.

It returned just 0.6% in 2016, according to Bloomberg.

2017 saw an upswing.

But according to the Center for Retirement Research…

Even if these plans attain their Pollyannaish 7.5% returns over the next few years… they’ll still be only 73% funded by 2021.

Howard Marks, co-founder and co-chairman of Oaktree Capital Group:

If you walked into a pension fund today which had no investments, and you were given a pile of cash and you invested today intelligently, prudently, but not shrinking from risk, I think you could expect to make something in the vicinity of 5% in the coming years from today.

A highly technical term describes the business… and we apologize if it sends you scurrying for the dictionary:

Insolvency.

Briefly turn your attention to the Golden State, for example…

California pins its hopes on that pie-in-sky 7.5% annual return.

But the state’s pension planners put returns over the next decade at barely 6% a year.

6%, 7% — what’s the difference?

From one year to the next, possibly little.

But repeat it every year… and the meaning of compounding negative returns eventually becomes clear enough.

And these calculations — as far as we understand — do not account for a market downturn.

California’s pension fund lost some $100 billion in the Great Recession.

It never fully recovered.

What if it happens again?

Smith:

The 2008–09 global financial meltdown was a taste of the reality facing public pension programs: Once annual returns slip from 7% annually to minus 7% annually, the pension plans are soon insolvent.

California is by no means alone.

The great state of Illinois, for example, risks sinking into a $130 billion “death spiral,” as Ted Dabrowski of the Illinois Policy Institute describes it.

Meantime, jilted pensioners can generate a good deal of hullabaloo.

And jilted pensioners vote.

Do you think Uncle Samuel will let the politically strategic states of California and Illinois — with their combined 75 electoral votes — go scratching?

And who will he hand the bill?

Consult the nearest mirror… and there you will find your sorrowful answer.

The problems are not limited to California or Illinois, of course.

From Portland to Portland, Lake Superior to the Mexican gulf…

American pensions are wrecked upon the rocks of actuarial fact.

Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner has warned that the state’s pension crisis is driving his beloved Land of Lincoln into “banana republic” territory.

Of course, the good governor’s mouth ran away with him here.

After all…

Who would compare the venerable, eminently worthy banana republic… to Illinois?

Deutsche Bank: è crollato l’utile netto. Tonfo del titolo

La prima trimestrale di Deutsche Bank ha rivelato un forte crollo dell’utile netto. Cosa ha influito sui conti del colosso tedesco e, di conseguenza, sull’andamento delle azioni societarie?

L’utile netto trimestrale di Deutsche Bank è crollato e ha trascinato nel baratro le azioni societarie in avvio di sessione.

Nei primi tre mesi dell’anno la flessione dell’utile è risultata del 79% e ha visto scendere il dato dai 575 milioni di euro del pari periodo 2017 a quota 120 milioni di euro. L’utile ante imposte del colosso tedesco è risultato di 432 milioni di euro (contro gli 878 milioni della prima trimestrale 2017).

A scendere, comunque, non sono stati soltanto gli utili ma anche i ricavi. Nel periodo di riferimento il dato è scivolato del 5% su quota 7 miliardi di euro. L’apprezzamento dell’euro rispetto al dollaro USA e i minori ricavi nel Corporate & Investment Bank hanno determinato in misura maggiore l’andamento dei conti trimestrali di Deutsche.

Anche il Common Equity Tier 1 ratio al 13,4% si è discostato dal 14,0% rilevato alla fine del 2017.

Il 2018 sarà l’anno dei tagli per Deutsche Bank

Di fronte ad una trimestrale non propriamente brillante, Deutsche Bank ha comunicato la sua intenzione di procedere ad una riduzione significativa della forza lavoro. Le suddette operazioni prenderanno il via già nel corso dell’anno corrente e si concentreranno sui settori meno redditizi per l’istituto tedesco, con particolare riferimento alle attività in Asia e negli Stati Uniti.

“Nel riallocare le risorse e migliorare l’efficienza del capitale e del bilancio, la banca ridimensionerà altre aree in cui il board ritiene che Deutsche Bank non abbia più un vantaggio competitivo e sostenibile nel mutato contesto di mercato”,

hanno fatto sapere dall’istituto.
I tagli riguarderanno soprattutto l’investment banking e avranno l’obiettivo di ridurre i costi adjusted sotto la soglia dei 23 miliardi di euro.

Come molti avevano previsto, a risentire in misura maggiore della prima trimestrale 2018 sono state le azioni Deutsche Bank, che hanno inaugurato l’odierna sessione di Borsa con una decisa flessione di quasi 4 punti percentuali. Gli ultimi mesi non sono stati certamente facili per il colosso tedesco, che dopo una chiusura di 2017 non particolarmente brillante ha dovuto anche dire addio al CEO John Cryan.

Al momento della scrittura le azioni Deutsche stanno scambiando con un ribasso del 3,68% su quota 11,56 euro.

Fonte: qui

Deutsche Bank annuncia riassetto e tagli al personale

Revisione attività, ridimensiona business tassi Usa e azionario

Deutsche Bank, la sede a Francoforte

Ansa- Deutsche Bank annuncia una revisione delle sue attività di corporate e investment banking (Cib) e "una significativa riduzione della forza lavoro nel 2018" allo scopo di rispettare l'obiettivo di mantenere la base di costi sotto i 23 miliardi di euro nel 2018. La banca ridimensionerà le attività Usa sui tassi (Us rates) e riesaminerà le attività sul mercato azionario (Global Equities) "con l'aspettativa di ridurre la sua piattaforma".

Il riassetto prevede un focus maggiore sulle attività di banca commerciale e private, oltre che nell'asset management, così da stabilizzare la base di ricavi, e un ridimensionamento delle attività internazionali, in particolare negli Usa, con l'obiettivo di dedicarsi maggiormente alla clientela europea e a quelle aree di attività in cui l'istituto tedesco vanta una leadership. Salva l'Italia, indicata da Deutsche Bank come uno dei "mercati in crescita" nel campo della banca commerciale e private su cui focalizzarsi.

"Deutsche Bank è profondamente radicata in Europa, dove vogliamo fornire ai nostri clienti accesso al soluzioni globali di finanziamento e di tesoreria. Questo è quello su cui ci focalizzeremo in modo più deciso andando avanti", ha commentato il ceo Christian Sewing. "Ridisegnare la Corporate & Investment Bank" causerà "riduzioni del personale nelle regioni e nelle aree di attività coinvolte" "dolorose" ma "inevitabili per assicurare alla nostra banca competitività nel lungo periodo".

Deutsche Bank parla di "aggiustamenti strategici per traghettare la banca verso fonti di ricavo più stabili e rafforzare le linee di business core. Entro il 2021 - si legge - la banca prevede una sostenibile quota di ricavi di almeno il 50% dalla banca commerciale e private e dall'attività di asset management di Dws. Considerando anche i ricavi del Global Transaction Banking la quota di ricavi stabili dovrebbe attestarsi al 65%".

Nel trimestre i ricavi sono scesi a 7 miliardi (-5% sul 2017) e un utile di 120 milioni (-79%). "Dobbiamo agire in modo deciso e rivedere la nostra strategia. Non c'è tempo da perdere in quanto gli attuali ritorni non sono accettabili", ha detto Sewing.