Also: > assets under management in its investment arm dropped 10 per cent to $3.6tn that would be 4t minus 400b (10%) == 3.6t where did the 60b number in the h

Also: > assets under management in its investment arm dropped 10 per cent to $3.6tn that would be 4t minus 400b (10%) == 3.6t where did the 60b number in the headline come from? And that is just one of the 2 banks mentioned in the article (not 3 as the headline mentions). Was this submission an attempt to see exactly how many things can be wrong in a single headline?