No worries, and thank you for your comprehensive reply! 
Indeed I have worked with the very straightforward - and apparently incorrect - assumption that as a +100 bps increase in interest rate level equals +30 MEUR NII, a +250 bps increase consequently corresponds to +75 MEUR NII.
I absolutely follow your logics that the increasing interest rates also impact Aktia’s cost side. However, I assumed that this was taken into account in the statement Aktia made that “+100 bps → +30 MEUR NII”, and that it consequently would be a roughly linear relationship between the incomes and the expenses. But bottom line is then that at some cross-over point, the bank’s cost of money will start to increaser faster (relatively seen) than its interest incomes, correct?
What is actually the main reason that e.g. Nordea’s NII came in quite a bit higher than forecasted by a small army of analysts? Is it indeed a shift in the ratio between customer deposits and bonds?
All in all, now I’m slightly more nervous about what will be presented on the 17th. ‘Ignorance is bliss’, ‘tieto lisää tuskaa’, and so on. 
PS. Euribor-12 seems unstoppable and is just about to reach 3,5%, up by 3,8% -units in 12 months. That might just be its fastest annual increase in history?