When exactly did Axel Lehmann become aware of state intervention?

class=”sc-3778e872-0 gWjAEa”>

While Axel Lehmann (64), Chairman of the Board of Directors of Credit Suisse (CS), enthusiastically declared such a solution “no problem”, did he already know anything about the government-coordinated CS emergency solution? A video recorded at the Financial Industry Conference 2023 held in the Saudi capital Riyadh is currently circulating in banking circles. In it, Lehmann speaks, believing that government intervention is not necessary in CS and that his bank has a “strong enough capital ratio”.

Now in retrospect he is blamed for it. The end of CS saying something like this while it’s already being followed in the background. Lehmann is mocked. The question is whether such a “misrepresentation” is justified.

Did everything go too fast?

When asked by Blick, CS did not comment on the video and Lehmann’s statements. A closer look at the sequence of events shows that Lehmann speaks in a panel discussion in Riyadh – two hours ahead of Switzerland – between 9 and 10 am. Federal Councilor Karin Keller-Sutter, 59, said at the Federal Council’s press conference the following Sunday that the first talks between the federal government, UBS and CS were held “on Wednesday afternoon”. In the evening of the same day, the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (Finma) and the Swiss National Bank (SNB) informed that “the problems of some banking institutions in the USA do not pose a direct risk of contamination for the Swiss financial market”. ” and CS “capital and liquidity requirements”. SNB will provide liquidity to CS “as needed”.

On Thursday, CS announced that it would accept help from the SNB. It’s a “normal process,” as even Keller-Sutter emphasizes. However, that same evening, the Federal Council decides, with the approval and financial assistance of the federal government, that CS should go to UBS.

The situation is developing rapidly. Whether Lehmann was aware of the state intervention on Wednesday morning cannot be proven and doubted. The only certainty is that Lehmann must have been aware of the dangerous state of his bank.

indifferent expression

That’s why the bank president has to put up with an accusation: his remarks in Riyadh were inadequate and careless for a large bank from which customers flee. “Lehmann needed to be prepared for the problem of state intervention,” says communications expert Ferris Bühler, 46. Lehmann had to admit, with his firm reply that there was no state interference, that this expression would hit him in the face if the situation changed. “Lehmann will have to leave state intervention as a possible option should the situation worsen,” says Bühler, rather than giving a unified response. “One can always say that you are struggling with difficulties.”

Unfortunately CS has always downplayed issues and often poorly communicated about many challenges. Bühler: “Public confidence lost despite strong balance sheet.”

Source :Blick