issuance in this settlement given that barclays did not buy lehman brothers until january of '09. maybe barclays feels they shouldn't be on the hook for anything lehman for anything did before that time. >> it took took time in the past for settlements. when looking at deutsche bank, they have assets of 1.6 trillion euros, give or take. hsbc's around 50% greater. still one of the top ten banks in the world. do you fear we will see ramifications in terms of contagion from the bad loans and high debt levels we're dealing with? >> i think it's receding. i think there was so much concern around deutsche bank in september, they had 500 billion of deposits, 2 00 billion liquidity. still a strong balance sheet, the problem was their capital situation. most of the larger banks can now cope with what's hitting them in terms of some of the litigation. it's taken a long time compared to u.s. banks, but they are step by step getting away from what occurred during the crisis. i guess i'm more sanguine about it. >> looking at deutsche bank shares at the moment, investors relieved but still some

about the fact that some of the issues the doj are dealing with is lehman brothers issues. saying we didn't the bank until we acquired it in 2009. maybe theyising, but think the number is ridiculous. this could end up in a settlement, rather than going to court. let's talk about where this leads both credits and the equity side when it comes to deutsche bank. john cryan needed to get this done by 2016. 2017 being aut downslope. how gradual is that downslope because of the litigation risk that deutsche now faces? are we over the worst? >> i think we are. this week, goldman sachs for $150 million for manipulating in the unitedndex states. i said to my sales team, that is a lot of money. but if we look at back in terms of what we have seen in litigation, we are starting to -- see the payoff here. plenty on the play for their lawyers teams. but nothing like we have seen today. guy: how does the market price that? christopher: to say we have got away from the emergency issue funding, whatever, that would have been necessary if it would have been 14. it was a postulant position b

another lehman brothers-type of moment? mr.lint: i think you saw the markets react very well to individual institutional events in 2016. one of the extraordinary parts of the referendum in june was people went to bed that night with the markets, commentators, pundits, pollsters predicting one result and woke up in the morning with a different outcome. market volumes were six times normal, huge volatility. banking stocks predominantly based in europe with european customer bases suffered 20%-30% declines, commodity prices were all over the place, and everything worked. everything settled. all the trades could be executed. there was liquidity to do everything. you stand back and say the ecosystem has been built that can withstand the system, so that gives you confidence that the system in aggregate is a great deal more resilient than it was. francine: what worries you now about brexit? mr. flint: just the period of uncertainty. you could model almost every option that you think might happen. the sooner there is some clarity and d

another lehman brothers type of moment?lint: i think you saw the markets react very well to individual institutional ignorance in 2016. extraordinary parts of the referendum in june was people went to bed that night with markets, commentators, pundits, pollsters predicting one result and woke up in the morning with a different outcome. market volumes were six times normal, huge volatility. banking stocks predominantly based in europe with european customer bases suffered 20%, 30% declines, commodity prices were all over the place, and everything worked. everything settled. all the trades could be executed. there was liquidity to do everything. you stand back and say the system has been built that can thattand the system, so gives you confidence that the system in aggregate is a great deal more resilient than it was. francine: what worries you now about brexit? mr. flint: just the uncertainty. you could model almost every option that you think might happen. the sooner there is some clarity means you can discard some of the o

another lehman brothers-type of moment? mr.lint: i think you saw the markets react very well to individual institutional events in 2016. one of the extraordinary parts of the referendum in june was people went to bed that night with the markets, commentators, pundits, pollsters predicting one result and woke up in the morning with a different outcome. market volumes were six times normal, huge volatility. banking stocks predominantly based in europe with european customer bases suffered 20%-30% declines, commodity prices were all over the place, and everything worked. everything settled. all the trades could be executed. there was liquidity to do everything. you stand back and say the ecosystem has been built that can withstand the system, so that gives you confidence that the system in aggregate is a great deal more resilient than it was. francine: what worries you now about brexit? mr. flint: just the period of uncertainty. you could model almost every option that you think might happen. the sooner there is some clarity and d

since they bought lehman brothers, at the height of the financial crisis, costs swelled. the company kept losing money abroad. those initiatives focused on cutting employees. most recently, they cut 900 people in europe and the to save 700order million dollars this fiscal year. it looks like those efforts are starting to pay off. the company is on track to post the first profit abroad in seven years they have earned ¥40 billion. turning to other ways to save money, mainly through this waterline project to eke out savings from everything they do. betty: much more ahead on "daybreak asia." japan trying to give more free employees,rworked but can they get their citizens to finally relax? ahead, our next guest says inflation will be the main source of concern in 2017. he is predicting four rate hikes from the fed. ♪ .": this is "daybreak asia quick check of the latest headlines. super mario is taking his run to more mobile devices. it has begunsaid preregistration. until now, the game has only been available on apple mobile. interest has tailed off. super mario run is no long

>> if you think about where we were last year, having conversations comparing glencore to the lehman brothersis is a full on crisis. to scrap dividends, commodity prices are way down the may had in. the company had $30 billion of debt. to engineer the turnaround we have seen, it has been quite remarkable. .hare prices tripled that is being held a lot by commodities prices. they have enacted a big debt reduction program. today announced they would reinstate the dividend. to go from the conversations last year to pay for $1 billion dividend next are is a leap forward for that company. >> i believe it is one of the best performing stocks on the ftse 100 this year. has this been primarily driven by the rebound we have been seeing and commodity prices, which might ask questions over sustainability, or has it been the debt reduction plan and with the management has been doing? definitely both. look at coal and commodities for glencore. both are up 70 send this year. they have sold $6 billion of assets, reduced the level down to $16 billion by the end of the year $230 billion by the and of last. ana

for lehman brothers, it took a to tumble.set prices after oil's collapse, we did not see the pain until5, so i would say we are in the first quarter if we were looking at a basketball game of four quarters. tracy: you not playing with the baseball analogy, basketball instead. aree: whichever quarter we in, it seems like we are witnessing secular change? angie., hi, we certainly are. there are reforms and measures that have taken place, countries and economies in the region making long-term structural changes to benefit and diversify economies to the alongside. -- for the long-term. when we talk about middle east and africa, what are talking about here? and how are you wanting investors off these equity markets? >> we are talking east from turkey to morocco and down to south africa, that is the geographical region we look at. that is the space. angie: are they miss priced in your view? of, sorry, can you please repeat the question? angie: do you think those priced right now? >> we certainly are. in general, the markets in the middle east and africa are mi spriced because they are dominat

lehman brothers was kind of the end of the trail. it was pretty ugly there for a while.st happened with the fixes -- so the question is, can you test the hypothesis that the system isn't as fragile? that is what the stress tests do. you implement a mortar coney an element and you show that, in our company's case and others, we come through with as much capital as we started with before the crisis. in general, we have twice or three times as much capital. now the question is, where do we stop and start going forward and have a better trade-off between the safety and soundness and the growth engine? charlie: these things have to do with politics and finance, which is climate. you had the president raise questions about climate change. he thoughtd him say there might be some connectivity between human activity and climate change. then he invited al gore to come in and see him and his daughter. appointed someone who was a huge opponent of epa to run epa. mr. trump is going to be a little harder for us to figure out. but let's step back. if you think about corporate whether i

deeply divided investment banks faced backgrounds, as they started to doubt solvency when one, lehman brotherso go under, regulators are the biggest firms are so interconnected that only massive bailouts kept dozens more from failing around the world. here's the argument -- democrats vowed to defend dodd-frank, saying it is slowly producing better banks. republicans and the former fed chair say it would be better to check the ever thicker roll block and make banks rely on heavy capital reserves. you can read more about bank regulation and olive quick takes at ni quick on the bloomberg. head to bloomberg.com for more stories. president-elect donald trump promised to crack down on undocumented immigrants during his campaign. since collected, yes softened his stance but policies could have an impact on business in the country. in an extensive interview detroit, bloomberg businessweek d megan murphy sat down with about --alysts asking and asked about how he expects the regulatory policies in america to change. jaime: i go to j.p. morgan chase and i told them that if you are black, jewish or lgbt,

lehman brothers was kind of the end of the trail. it was pretty ugly there for a while.hat happened with the fixes is -- so the question is, can you test the hypothesis that the system isn't as fragile? that is what the stress tests do. you implement a mortar coney an element and you show that, in our company's case and others, we come through with as much capital as we started with before the crisis. in general, we have twice or three times as much capital. now the question is, where do we stop and start going forward and have a better trade-off between the safety and soundness and the growth engine? charlie: these things have to do with politics and finance, which is climate. you had the president raise questions about climate change. then you had him say he thought there might be some connectivity between human activity and climate change. then he invited al gore to come in and see him and his daughter. then he appointed someone who was a huge opponent of epa to run epa. brian: mr. trump is going to be a little harder for us to figure out. but let's step back. if you

prospective homeowners to get a mortgage, car buyers to get a loan, and right before election day, lehman brothersollapsed, unleashing a real, actual fear that the whole financial system could come crashing down. it's hard to remember that right now, thank goodness. across the country, people are rapidly losing confidence in the government's ability to stem pan ic and the government was the ability to save the financial system. we have to remember the real lives of millions of american households and businesses outside of wall street, off of wall street. this month eight years ago, we had already lost 695,000 jobs. good paying, middle-class jobs. when barack and i placed our hands on the bible as we were sworn in on january 20, 2009, we had already lost almost 700,000 -- at that moment -- and we ended up losing 800,000 by the end of january. unemployment would eat at 10%. saw-term unemployment historical highs. the poverty rate exceeded 15% -- that's the highest level in decades. the stock market plummeted. it's hard to believe it now. it was going to fall below 6000. that was the debate. trillion

car buyers to get a loan and right before election day, lehman brothers collapsed unleashing a real, actual fear that the whole financial system could come crashing down. it is hard to remember that right now, thank goodness. across the country, people were rapidly losing confidence in the government's ability to stem panic and stabilize the financial system. we have to remember that the turmoil in the financial sector led to crippling conditions in the real economy, the real lives of millions of american households and businesses outside of wall street, off of wall street. this month, eight years ago, we had already lost 695,000 jobs. good paying, middle class jobs. when barack obama and i placed our hands on the bible, we were sworn in on january 20th, 2009, we had already lost almost 700,000 at that moment and ended up losing more than 800,000 that month of january. unemployment would peak at 10%. long-term unemployment saw historic highs. poverty rating seeded 15%. the stock market plummeted. was it going to fall below $6,000? trillions of dollars in wealth lost, decades of retir

major institution couldn't pay their debt, either they let it go bankrupt, which they did with lehman brothersch caused a terrible economic shutdown or they paid off all the doefts aig and kept it in business. our law says no more of that. if a big company or bank comes to the federal government and says we can't pay our debts and they're so indebted because the law permitted them to be irresponsible, they can't do that anymore. under the law, the federal government would say okay, fine. you're out of business. here is the door. we're taking over your operation. and if we have to pay any federal money to reduce those debts, we're going to assess the other big banks to pay it off. there is this whole set of rules that we put in to make sure that people do not get indebted beyond what they can pay off. because it was that that caused the crisis. and patiently that's what he wants to repeal. and again, the hypocrisy of this man saying i'm for the little guy. wall street hasn't been this happy since herbert hoover made andrew mellon secretary of the treasury that led to the great depression. >> ba

, frauds, and mount banks, especially those who got burned owning the old, say, fannie mae or lehman brothers, but, look, that's the wrong lesson to draw from the crash. healthy skepticism is one thing, a total unwillingness to believe in anything positive is something else entirely. if you're going to own stocks, you need to be willing to extend some measure of trust to the people who run the companies that you own shares of. what else could be going on to spur buy something we've had a massive amount of consolidation in a host of industries of late. we've seen it in airlines, rental cars, foods, telecommunications, entertainment. perhaps these executives are buying stock because they hear the footsteps. maybe they've been contacted by some other company and turned that company down. if executives expect they may be next, it could be a healthy and honest reason to buy. of course they have to disclose anything that's a serious bid. a lot of times, they just get a phone call, say no, bye. well, they do that because the company is worth more than they thought. maybe they think the company could

going forward, but you know, last year, we were sitting here talking about the comparisons to lehman brothersut it in that context, it is quite a dramatic piece of orbit movement there. of: trading -- piece corporate movement there. guy: trading. how much is this down to what is happening on the trading platform and what happens in the coal phase, as it were? jesse: trading has been one area for glencore that has been quite steadfast in his downturn. last year was around the same level. the industrial division, the mining division, was the real point last year where they were struggling. prices were very low. they were struggling to turn a profit. going forward, profits would be heavily linked to the new dividend policy the announced today. guy: so what next? jesse: they like to do a deal. as he looks around the landscape in front of him, he's stabilized it. they are not taking water on anymore. guy: where does he take this business? jesse: that is a really good question. he had a reputation for being a real swashbuckling, aggressive dealmaker. that typified the company's early existence as a

russell: the lehman brothers board inherited some hefty personnel costs. this is quite different. this is more about efficiency throughout the organization. most recently, they cut 900 thele in europe and americans to save $700 million this fiscal year. a look says this this is starting -- it looks as if this is helping to become more profitable. to be profitable outside of japan for the first time in two years. cuts, now theyst are eking out savings from everyday tasks that employees do on the job. rishaad: thank you very much. still ahead, super mario is said .o hop onto android devices i ♪ minutes of trading, eking out a small gain. nikkei on the way down. it'sext guest says that time to take profit now that the trump rally is phasing out. the reflation has been driving the market thus far, so i the prospect of it. thisre suggesting that market is fizzling out. can say that the economic activities are improving. the u.s. economy is operating at full capacity. and inflation is increasing across the board. and inflation is going to be a big thing for 2017. does this also mean tha

the failure of lehman brothers was a good case in point, and the worry at the time was that if large financial institutions were simply allowed to fail, they would have a knock-down effect that would bring down the entire financial network and beyond. so that was the concern, and i think it's valid that the resolution mechanism at the time was insufficient. so in the wake of this crisis, congress stepped in and decided we have to do something about it. and of course what they did was they gave us dodd-frank, a law that is very badly flawed in many ways, in part because it failed -- at least the authors failed to fully comprehend the cause of this crisis, and because they took the wrong fundamentally approach to dealing with it. most fundamentally was a conceptual flaw, which is that future financial crises would be avoided by having the government impose enormous control, very extensive control, and not by freeing up market discipline to prevent the crisis from occurring. i think that is very much at the heart of the fundamental conceptual flaw of dodd-frank. some of the specifics, b

the rejection of the referendum was an exactly brexit and monty is not exactly lehman brothers.s third-largest lender work to fall, it would necessarily lead to contagion elsewhere. that's what a lot of experts were saying. given that italy is such an important player in europe at its banks are falling apart, that can't be good for the euro, nor the international interconnected economy and that includes the united states if at some point there is another dreaded euro crisis. the oldest bank in the world founded two decades before columbus got to america. it's in real trouble trying to get clearance as we speed from financial regulators to take one last stab at raising the over 5 billion euros in recapitalization it needs by year-end. if not the governments ready to step in and it's not just teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. several other time banks in desperate need of cash and asian. italy's new prime minister said earlier this week i want to say very clearly on this occasion that the government as you know and as is necessary as ready to intervene to guarantee stability of

prospective homeowners to get a mortgage, car buyers to get a loan, and right before election day, lehman brothers, unleashing a real, actual fear the whole financial system could come crashing down. it's hard to remember that right now, thank goodness. across the country, people are rapidly losing confidence in the government's -- were rapidly losing confidence in the to stemnt's ability panic. the real consequences for american households, american businesses outside of wall street, awful wall street. we had already lost 695,000 jobs . good thing, middle-class jobs. when barack and i placed our hands on the bible as we were 20, 2009, we or had already lost almost 700,000 -- at that moment -- and we by thep losing 800,000 end of january. -- poverty rate exceeded 15% that's the highest level in decades. the stock market plummeted. it's hard to believe it now. it was going to fall below 6000. that was the debate. trillions of dollars of wealth lost. savingsof retirement lost overnight. i think we are still feeling the lingering effects in terms of how people conduct themselves. falling real estate

francine: i like reminding americans that they had lehman brothers. tom: this is serious.at there is a difference wave the american investors look at the italian banks and the way the italians view it. the italian banks are struggling because of growth. it is not all about the fact that they are hiding it. knowledge ofthe the nonperforming loans in a good bank like unicredit? do you have a clue? >> we have their accounting statements. regulator has come in only very recently. what it is doing is providing some consistency because each country was looking after the supervision of its own banks. what the ecb is doing is creating a standard that is -- portable we are seeing now is a reflection of that. the ecb is going in and taking a closer look and applying the same standards across the board. it is driving some of what we are seeing. francine: if you look at monte government if the had to step in, which is more likely now because of the referendum. under, i don't know what the potential for that is, is it a systemic risk? >> yes. the bank has been deemed sufficiently large

prospective homeowners to get a mortgage, car buyers to get a loan, and right before election day, lehman brotherslapsed, unleashing a real, actual fear the whole financial system could come crashing down. it's hard to remember that right now, thank goodness. across the country, people are rapidly losing confidence in the government's -- were rapidly losing confidence in the government's ability to stem panic. the real consequences for american households, american businesses outside of wall street, off of wall street. we had already lost 695,000 jobs. good paying, middle-class jobs. when barack and i placed our hands on the bible as we were sworn in on january 20, 2009, we had already lost almost 700,000 -- at that moment -- and we ended up losing 800,000 by the end of january. long-term unemployment saw historic highs. the poverty rate exceeded 15% -- that's the highest level in decades. the stock market plummeted. it's hard to believe it now. it was going to fall below 6000. that was the debate. trillions of dollars of wealth lost. decades of retirement savings lost overnight. i think we are st

the financial crisis -- >> lehman brothers and sisters we wouldn't have jumped off that cliff. >> i thinkheck. you want the combination of more risk tolerance and less risk tolerance and different approaches to the problem. are there instances that you found during your research where somebo acting on sdm instinct does a better job than somebody going on data and experience? >> that will always happen because you are dealing with essentially situations where you are wrong some of the time. purely by chance someone guessing -- >> here is an example, we are in the age of trump. a guy that every brilliant person said had a 1% chance of winning. >> i think the best data person is nate silver and said he had almost a 30% chance of winning. he said if there are systematic errors in the polls these guys could win. that was the best description of the environment going into the election. >> through the primary he said he had absolutely no chance of winning. >> no he didn't. >> never said zero chances of anything. >> nate silver and the data change has had a horrific year because they thought that

when the lehman brothers was going under, regulators decided they were so connected that only dozensdemocrats vowed to defend dodd-frank saying it is slowly but surely -- the former fed chair says it would be better to check the ever thicker ruble can make banks rely on hefty capital reserve spirit you can read more about bank regulation at all of our quick takes on the bloomberg. that is your global business report. head to bloomberg.com for the full story. ♪ david: keri geiger helps to break the story for us. what do we know about the loans that donald trump has in terms of those loans. >> they are pretty typical loans. they have recourse loans. says i am personal responsible -- personally responsible for it. couple ofught up a really fascinating questions. it is completely uncharted territory. wall street bank that the president of the united states will only money to. typically there is no reason to restructure the loans or negotiate the term. beholdendent will be to the bank and the bank will be beholden to the bank. david: a sense within the bank of how this needs to happen. >>