83,243
edits
Template:Isda 9(c) summ: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
As far as the [[JC]] can see, through his fogged-up, purblind spectacles, this doubt, like most, didn’t ''need'' avoiding and shouldn’t have been present in the mind of a legal eagle of stout mental fortitude: it is clear on its face that terminating a transaction under pre-specified mechanism in the contract is not to cancel the contract and sue for damages, but to exercise an option arising under it, and all your mechanical firepower remains in place. | As far as the [[JC]] can see, through his fogged-up, purblind spectacles, this doubt, like most, didn’t ''need'' avoiding and shouldn’t have been present in the mind of a legal eagle of stout mental fortitude: it is clear on its face that terminating a transaction under pre-specified mechanism in the contract is not to cancel the contract and sue for damages, but to exercise an option arising under it, and all your mechanical firepower remains in place. | ||
Indeed, there is no mechanism for terminating an {{isdama}} itself, at all. This has led at least [[Jolly Contrarian|one commentator]] to [[Undead ISDA|hypothesise]] that this proves that derivatives trading is all some ''Illuminati'' conspiracy. | Indeed, there is no mechanism for terminating an {{isdama}} itself, at all. Even in peace-time. This has led at least [[Jolly Contrarian|one commentator]] to [[Undead ISDA|hypothesise]] that this proves that derivatives trading is all some kind of ''Illuminati'' conspiracy. | ||