112,05 idag som laveste idag. Hvorfor er danske banks kurs ikke højere? Når regnskabet kommer næste gang, må tallene da være ok. Danske bank og Nordea er i samme rentemarked og Nordea er steget signifikant i kurs, så kursen på danske bank må være undervurderet, eller hvad? Jeg har tænkt at 130 kr per aktie er bedre...
18/6 2021 09:47 Bankens 0
94423 alle der har aktier i banken fra tiden med TB hader sku da den bank - mega manko for min egen part
18/6 2021 10:08 stocktiger 194428 Danske bank er ikke populær, men de tjener penge og det bør kursen også regne ind.
Tror ikke der er nogen som kan give en forklaring på den lave kurs.Man kan ikke andet end lade den ligge og måske supplere. Men hvis de kommer med udbytte fra 2019 har året været ok.
Synes det virker ret åbenlyst, at så længe der er så mange åbne spørgsmål hvad angår retssager der ikke er endeligt afgjort, vil der fortsat være pres på kursen.
Synes i øvrigt at det kan undre at INGEN åbenbart er ansvarlige for den hvidvask der er foregået.
Selv en tidligere ansat i deres Norske datterselskab, har lagt sag an mod Danske møntvask.
https://www.proinvestor.com/investornyt/676184/tidligere-direktor-i-danske-bank-er-med-i-hvidvasksogsmal
Synes i øvrigt at det kan undre at INGEN åbenbart er ansvarlige for den hvidvask der er foregået.
Selv en tidligere ansat i deres Norske datterselskab, har lagt sag an mod Danske møntvask.
https://www.proinvestor.com/investornyt/676184/tidligere-direktor-i-danske-bank-er-med-i-hvidvasksogsmal
Ivar Heggem, der er tidligere direktør i Danske Banks norske datterselskab, er del af en gruppe på 13 private investorer, som sagsøger Danske Bank for det kurstab, de har lidt på deres aktier som følge af hvidvasksagen.
https://www.euroinvestor.dk/nyheder/tidligere-danske-bank-direktoer-er-med-i-hvidvasksoegsmaal
Er det mon noget de kan få noget ud af?
Skulle de få ret i dette søgsmål, så vil der nok være flere der prøver samme sag, hvad er forældelsesfristen for sådan et søgsmål?
Er der mon lignende søgsmål igang i Danmark?
https://www.euroinvestor.dk/nyheder/tidligere-danske-bank-direktoer-er-med-i-hvidvasksoegsmaal
Er det mon noget de kan få noget ud af?
Skulle de få ret i dette søgsmål, så vil der nok være flere der prøver samme sag, hvad er forældelsesfristen for sådan et søgsmål?
Er der mon lignende søgsmål igang i Danmark?
18/6 2021 15:13 Rinus 094438 Jo men bortset fra en tidligere ansat har lagt sag an mod DB er der vel intet nyt.
18/6 2021 15:14 stocktiger 094439 Skidt dag for kursen. Men kan disse søgsmål flytte ved ret meget ved bankens forretning? De personer, der måske får skylden for hvidvask, har forladt Danske Bank for længe siden.
Stocktiger, de tyske banker får også tæsk i dag, så det er ikke specifikt for Danske Bank at kursen falder.
18/6 2021 21:53 stocktiger 094449 Nordea havde heller ikke nogen god dag. Nordea er noget foran Danske bank på kursstigning i år så vidt jeg løst kan fornemme, men Danske bank er nok også mere ramt af omtaler i hvidvaskskandalerne end Nordea. Normalt plejer Nordea og Danske bank at stige/falde i nogenlund samme takt da de inde for samme forretningsområde/marked.
19/6 2021 11:37 Rinus 094463 Forventer at supplere lidt, håber på 2019 udbyttet.
Og så vente på 2023.
Og så vente på 2023.
Fra annual report:
P26. Contingent liabilities continued
On 3 March 2019, a court case was initiated against Danske Bank for approval of a class action lead by a newly formed association with the aim to
represent former and current shareholders in a liability action relating to the Estonian AML matter. On 21 January 2021, the court dismissed the case
because it did not fulfil the criteria for being approved as a class action. The Bank expects that the association will seek to appeal the dismissal. The
appeal, if any, would not be decided until late 2021 at the earliest. In March 2019 (153), October 2019 (60), January 2020 (9), and March 2020 (38)
and in September 2020 (55), in total 315 separate cases were initiated against the Bank with a total claim amount of approximately DKK 7.5 billion. On
27 December 2019 (63) and on 4 September 2020 (30), two separate claims were filed by 93 investors against Danske Bank with a total claim amount
of approximately DKK 1.7 billion. On 2 September 2020, 20 separate claims were filed by 20 investors against Danske Bank with a total claim amount
of approximately DKK 1.1 billion. On 18 September 2020, one case was filed by 201 investors with a total claim value of approximately DKK 2.1 billion.
On 18 September 2020, one case was filed against the Bank (and the Bank's former CEO, Thomas F. Borgen) by two investors with a total claim amount
of DKK 10 million. These court actions relate to alleged violations in the Bank's branch in Estonia of the rules on prevention of money laundering and/or
alleged failure to timely inform the market of such violations (and in one claim, also market manipulation). 209 of the 315 cases filed in the period from
March 2019 to September 2020 have been referred to the Eastern High Court. The remaining 106 cases are currently stayed before the Copenhagen
City Court. The Bank intends to defend itself against these claims. The timing of completion of any such lawsuits (pending or threatening) and their
outcome are uncertain.
On 20 February 2020, Danske Bank received a procedural notification in a case initiated against Thomas F. Borgen by 74 institutional investors, and
funded by the litigation funder Deminor Recovery Services. The total claim amount is approximately DKK 2.7 billion. Under Danish law, the purpose of a
procedural notification is to make a formal reservation of rights to bring a potential claim against the notified party in the future.
Og fra Q1:
(c) Regulatory and legal proceedings
Estonia matter
Danske Bank remains in dialogue with various authorities regarding the terminated non-resident portfolio at the Bank’s Estonian branch. This includes criminal and regulatory investigations by authorities in Estonia, Denmark, France and the United States. The Bank continues to cooperate with all authorities.
In 2018, the Estonian Office of the Prosecutor General opened a criminal investigation into former employees of the Estonian branch.
In November 2018, Danske Bank was preliminary charged by the Danish State Prosecutor for Serious Economic and International Crime (“SØIK”) with violating the Danish AML Act on four counts all relating to the Estonian branch in the period from 1 February 2007 to the end of January 2016. In October 2020,
SØIK added violation of the Danish Financial Business Act for governance and control failures in the period from 1 February 2007 to the end of 2017 to the
preliminary charges.
In February 2019, Danske Bank was placed under formal investigation by an investigating judge of the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris in the context of
an on-going French criminal investigation and on the grounds of money laundering suspicions relating to certain transactions in the terminated portfolio of
non-resident customers of the Bank’s Estonian branch, amounting to around DKK 160 million and performed between 2007 and 2014. The Bank has posted
bail in the amount of DKK 80 million.
In December 2020, Danske Bank was informed by the U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) that it had decided to close
its investigation of Danske Bank in relation to the Estonia case with no action. OFAC is the U.S. authority responsible for civil enforcement of U.S. sanctions.
The decision does not preclude OFAC from taking future enforcement action should new or additional information warrant renewed attention.
The Bank is reporting to, responding to and cooperating with various authorities, including SØIK, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC), relating to the Bank’s Estonian branch. The internal investigation work planned by the Bank was completed and the findings
were reported to relevant authorities in 2020. The Bank continues to fully cooperate and will provide the authorities with further information if and when
requested. The overall timing of the authorities’ investigations remains unknown and is not within the Bank’s control. It is not yet possible to reliably estimate
the timing, form of resolution, or amount of potential settlement or fines, which could be material
Based on orders from the Danish FSA, Danske Bank’s solvency need has been increased in 2018 by a Pillar II add-on of in total DKK 10 billion to ensure
adequate capital coverage of the increased compliance and reputational risks in relation to the Estonian AML matter.
On 9 January 2019, an action was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York by an alleged holder of Danske Bank’s
American Depositary Receipts, representing its ordinary shares, against the Bank and certain of its officers and former officers and/or directors. The
complaint alleges that the defendants violated Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by, among other things, making
false and misleading statements and/or failing to disclose adverse information regarding the Bank’s business and operations in relation to AML matters
relating to the Bank’s Estonian branch and related matters.
Så man kan sige de er i en mini TEVA situation med en del retssager.
Og selv om man ikke hører nyt, spøger de i baggrunden
P26. Contingent liabilities continued
On 3 March 2019, a court case was initiated against Danske Bank for approval of a class action lead by a newly formed association with the aim to
represent former and current shareholders in a liability action relating to the Estonian AML matter. On 21 January 2021, the court dismissed the case
because it did not fulfil the criteria for being approved as a class action. The Bank expects that the association will seek to appeal the dismissal. The
appeal, if any, would not be decided until late 2021 at the earliest. In March 2019 (153), October 2019 (60), January 2020 (9), and March 2020 (38)
and in September 2020 (55), in total 315 separate cases were initiated against the Bank with a total claim amount of approximately DKK 7.5 billion. On
27 December 2019 (63) and on 4 September 2020 (30), two separate claims were filed by 93 investors against Danske Bank with a total claim amount
of approximately DKK 1.7 billion. On 2 September 2020, 20 separate claims were filed by 20 investors against Danske Bank with a total claim amount
of approximately DKK 1.1 billion. On 18 September 2020, one case was filed by 201 investors with a total claim value of approximately DKK 2.1 billion.
On 18 September 2020, one case was filed against the Bank (and the Bank's former CEO, Thomas F. Borgen) by two investors with a total claim amount
of DKK 10 million. These court actions relate to alleged violations in the Bank's branch in Estonia of the rules on prevention of money laundering and/or
alleged failure to timely inform the market of such violations (and in one claim, also market manipulation). 209 of the 315 cases filed in the period from
March 2019 to September 2020 have been referred to the Eastern High Court. The remaining 106 cases are currently stayed before the Copenhagen
City Court. The Bank intends to defend itself against these claims. The timing of completion of any such lawsuits (pending or threatening) and their
outcome are uncertain.
On 20 February 2020, Danske Bank received a procedural notification in a case initiated against Thomas F. Borgen by 74 institutional investors, and
funded by the litigation funder Deminor Recovery Services. The total claim amount is approximately DKK 2.7 billion. Under Danish law, the purpose of a
procedural notification is to make a formal reservation of rights to bring a potential claim against the notified party in the future.
Og fra Q1:
(c) Regulatory and legal proceedings
Estonia matter
Danske Bank remains in dialogue with various authorities regarding the terminated non-resident portfolio at the Bank’s Estonian branch. This includes criminal and regulatory investigations by authorities in Estonia, Denmark, France and the United States. The Bank continues to cooperate with all authorities.
In 2018, the Estonian Office of the Prosecutor General opened a criminal investigation into former employees of the Estonian branch.
In November 2018, Danske Bank was preliminary charged by the Danish State Prosecutor for Serious Economic and International Crime (“SØIK”) with violating the Danish AML Act on four counts all relating to the Estonian branch in the period from 1 February 2007 to the end of January 2016. In October 2020,
SØIK added violation of the Danish Financial Business Act for governance and control failures in the period from 1 February 2007 to the end of 2017 to the
preliminary charges.
In February 2019, Danske Bank was placed under formal investigation by an investigating judge of the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris in the context of
an on-going French criminal investigation and on the grounds of money laundering suspicions relating to certain transactions in the terminated portfolio of
non-resident customers of the Bank’s Estonian branch, amounting to around DKK 160 million and performed between 2007 and 2014. The Bank has posted
bail in the amount of DKK 80 million.
In December 2020, Danske Bank was informed by the U.S. Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) that it had decided to close
its investigation of Danske Bank in relation to the Estonia case with no action. OFAC is the U.S. authority responsible for civil enforcement of U.S. sanctions.
The decision does not preclude OFAC from taking future enforcement action should new or additional information warrant renewed attention.
The Bank is reporting to, responding to and cooperating with various authorities, including SØIK, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the U.S. Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC), relating to the Bank’s Estonian branch. The internal investigation work planned by the Bank was completed and the findings
were reported to relevant authorities in 2020. The Bank continues to fully cooperate and will provide the authorities with further information if and when
requested. The overall timing of the authorities’ investigations remains unknown and is not within the Bank’s control. It is not yet possible to reliably estimate
the timing, form of resolution, or amount of potential settlement or fines, which could be material
Based on orders from the Danish FSA, Danske Bank’s solvency need has been increased in 2018 by a Pillar II add-on of in total DKK 10 billion to ensure
adequate capital coverage of the increased compliance and reputational risks in relation to the Estonian AML matter.
On 9 January 2019, an action was filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York by an alleged holder of Danske Bank’s
American Depositary Receipts, representing its ordinary shares, against the Bank and certain of its officers and former officers and/or directors. The
complaint alleges that the defendants violated Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by, among other things, making
false and misleading statements and/or failing to disclose adverse information regarding the Bank’s business and operations in relation to AML matters
relating to the Bank’s Estonian branch and related matters.
Så man kan sige de er i en mini TEVA situation med en del retssager.
Og selv om man ikke hører nyt, spøger de i baggrunden
Disclaimer - Hvor længe kan man mon blive ved med at finde skeletter i denne bank?
Kan man måske være sikker på Deres computerprogrammer regner rigtig i aktiehandler, jeg har ind til videre ikke lavet efterberegninger på mine handler, men måske det ville være en god ide?
https://www.euroinvestor.dk/nyheder/lige-nu-bagmandspolitiet-sigter-danske-bank
Kan man måske være sikker på Deres computerprogrammer regner rigtig i aktiehandler, jeg har ind til videre ikke lavet efterberegninger på mine handler, men måske det ville være en god ide?
https://www.euroinvestor.dk/nyheder/lige-nu-bagmandspolitiet-sigter-danske-bank
Man skal altid lave sine egne stik prøver, hvor man ser i markedet hvordan ens handler reelt er eksekveret og hvordan de afregnes på ens konto.
Jeg har dog endnu ikke fundet nogle fejl, selv de gange jeg synes det så underligt ud, var det rent faktisk korrekt når man regnede efter.
Det var ikke i Danske Bank, men jeg har ret stor tillid til at de også regner rigtigt.
Jeg har dog endnu ikke fundet nogle fejl, selv de gange jeg synes det så underligt ud, var det rent faktisk korrekt når man regnede efter.
Det var ikke i Danske Bank, men jeg har ret stor tillid til at de også regner rigtigt.
Danske Bank er langt fra Teva's situation. Efter USA frafaldt deres hovedsag, så er der ingen sag tilbage som kan true bankens eksistens. Resten er rent kravl som ikke kommer til at betyde det store rent økonomisk, selv hvis sagsøgerne vinder sagerne (hvilket langt de fleste ikke kommer til).
Men der bruges stadig en del energi og advokater på de ca. 300 sager.
Og så kaldte jeg det "mini Teva situation"
Og så kaldte jeg det "mini Teva situation"
