Template:Emissions Allowance Quantity summ: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page with "whatever your trading regime, you will need a means to designate ''how many'' Allowances you are planning to trade. It ought not be a hrd concept to label, and it should not differ from agreement to agreement but, for reasons best known to themselves, the three Carbon Squads were could not contrive a common terminology between them, even though they managed to in many other areas where you rather wish they hadn’t. It is what it is; we quite like ISDA’s unusually...")
 
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
whatever your trading regime, you will need a means to designate ''how many'' Allowances you are planning to trade. It ought not be a hrd concept to label, and it should not differ from agreement to agreement but, for reasons best known to themselves, the three [[Carbon Squad]]s were could not contrive a common terminology between them, even though they managed to in many other areas where you rather wish they hadn’t. It is what it is; we quite like ISDA’s unusually colloquial {{euaprov|Number of Allowances}}; EFET’s {{efetaprov|Contract Quantity}}, while a bit starchier, isn’t bad, but {{ietaprov|PTA Quantity}} borders on the perverse. What is this? A parent teacher association?
Whatever your documentation regime, you will need a means to designate ''how many'' {{{{{1}}}|Allowances}} you are planning to trade.  


In any case, to make life easier for you dear reader, in our pages, where the interests of doubt reduction recommend it, we will refer generically to an “{{{{{1}}}|Allowance Quantity}}”, which will redirect to the correct term in each case.
It ''ought'' not be a hard concept to label, and it should not differ from agreement to agreement but, for reasons best known to themselves, the three [[Carbon Squad]]s could, ir did, not contrive a common terminology between them, even though they managed to in many other areas where you rather wish they hadn’t.
 
It is what it is; we quite like ISDA’s unusually colloquial “{{euaprov|Number of Allowances}}”; EFET’s “{{efetaprov|Contract Quantity}}”, while a bit starchier, isn’t bad, but “{{ietaprov|PTA Quantity}}” borders on the perverse. What is this? A parent teacher association?
 
In any case, to make life easier for you, dear reader, in these pages, where the interests of doubt reduction recommend it, we might here and there refer generally to an “{{{{{1}}}|Allowance Quantity}}” meaning whichever of the above applies, and this will redirect to the correct term in each case.

Latest revision as of 15:31, 16 October 2023

Whatever your documentation regime, you will need a means to designate how many {{{{{1}}}|Allowances}} you are planning to trade.

It ought not be a hard concept to label, and it should not differ from agreement to agreement but, for reasons best known to themselves, the three Carbon Squads could, ir did, not contrive a common terminology between them, even though they managed to in many other areas where you rather wish they hadn’t.

It is what it is; we quite like ISDA’s unusually colloquial “Number of Allowances”; EFET’s “Contract Quantity”, while a bit starchier, isn’t bad, but “PTA Quantity” borders on the perverse. What is this? A parent teacher association?

In any case, to make life easier for you, dear reader, in these pages, where the interests of doubt reduction recommend it, we might here and there refer generally to an “{{{{{1}}}|Allowance Quantity}}” meaning whichever of the above applies, and this will redirect to the correct term in each case.