Template:Pgmsla nominee capsule: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
Line 1: Line 1:
The reference (in the pledge version only) to a {{pgmslaprov|Nominee}}, we think, is a flag to recognise that the {{pgmsla}} is typically suitable only for [[agency lending]] arrangements, in which the principal {{pgmslaprov|Lender}}s to the {{pgmslaprov|Loan}}s will be wealth-management clients and funds whose assets are managed by an [[agent lender]], and who have handed over responsibility for managing their {{pgmslaprov|Loan}}s to the [[agent lender]], who in turn has put the whole business in the hands of a [[triparty agent]], who will manage the collateral flows, pledges and all that good oil. Though why they didn’t say “ tri-party agent”, it is hard to say, since “nominee” has, in other custody contexts, a rather different meaning. And there is nothing to stop folks using a tri-party arrangement with a normal {{gmsla}} either, for that matter, and it has routinely been done for as long as anyone can remember.
The reference (in the pledge version only) to a {{pgmslaprov|Nominee}}, may be to recognise that the {{pgmsla}} is typically suitable only for [[agency lending]] arrangements, in which the principal {{pgmslaprov|Lender}}s to the {{pgmslaprov|Loan}}s will be wealth-management clients and funds whose assets are managed by an [[agent lender]], who in turn has put the whole business in the hands of a [[triparty agent]], who will manage the collateral flows, pledges and all that good oil.  
 
Though why they didn’t say “tri-party agent”, it is hard to say, since “nominee” has, in other custody contexts, a rather different meaning. And there is nothing to stop folks using a tri-party arrangement with a normal {{gmsla}} either, for that matter, and it has routinely been done for as long as anyone can remember.

Latest revision as of 17:51, 20 September 2021

The reference (in the pledge version only) to a Nominee, may be to recognise that the 2018 Pledge GMSLA is typically suitable only for agency lending arrangements, in which the principal Lenders to the Loans will be wealth-management clients and funds whose assets are managed by an agent lender, who in turn has put the whole business in the hands of a triparty agent, who will manage the collateral flows, pledges and all that good oil.

Though why they didn’t say “tri-party agent”, it is hard to say, since “nominee” has, in other custody contexts, a rather different meaning. And there is nothing to stop folks using a tri-party arrangement with a normal 2010 GMSLA either, for that matter, and it has routinely been done for as long as anyone can remember.