83,056
edits
Reverse inquiry: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
For what kind of offshore client, of her own motion, innocently writes her broker such a letter? Only one who has been told to, we submit. Now if you really can evidence the genuine unsolicited request for your services, as it arrived unbidden on your potential client’s scented personal notepaper, then happy days: keep the letter somewhere safe. If you can’t, don’t think contriving a phony letter pretending that happened will help. | For what kind of offshore client, of her own motion, innocently writes her broker such a letter? Only one who has been told to, we submit. Now if you really can evidence the genuine unsolicited request for your services, as it arrived unbidden on your potential client’s scented personal notepaper, then happy days: keep the letter somewhere safe. If you can’t, don’t think contriving a phony letter pretending that happened will help. | ||
On the other hand, while it undoubtedly aggrieves ESMA that huckster brokers from the [[United Kingdom|failed states around the EEA periphery]] should be flirting outrageously with their innocent fund managers, not even ESMA has got so much time on its hands or bureaucratic energy that will send flying squads of Belgian paratroopers out to dawn-raid EU fund managers to see exactly how they came to meet their brokers: they are far too busy inspecting their [[Netting opinion|netting opinions]] for that. | |||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||