Template:M summ Equity Derivatives 12.8(a): Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Template:M summ Equity Derivatives 12.8(a) (view source)

Revision as of 12:47, 21 February 2022

136 bytes added , 21 February 2022

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

83,240

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{eqderivprov|Cancellation Amount}} is a beast of a definition. But when you boil it down, it’s pretty straightforward. It applies when terminating a {{eqderivprov|Transaction}} following an {{eqderivprov|Extraordinary Event}} or an {{eqderivprov|Additional Disruption Event}}.
+{{eqderivprov|Cancellation Amount}} is a beast of a definition. But when you boil it down, it’s pretty straightforward. It applies when terminating a {{eqderivprov|Transaction}} following an {{eqderivprov|Extraordinary Event}} or an {{eqderivprov|Additional Disruption Event}}. Importantly, by dint of Section {{eqderivprov|12.8(e)}}, the {{eqderivprov|Determining Party}} may pass through hedge breakage costs and losses.
+====Geopolitical events====
-Importantly, by dint of Section {{eqderivprov|12.8(e)}}, the {{eqderivprov|Determining Party}} may pass through hedge breakage costs and losses.
-===Geopolitical events===
 Now, what gains or losses might the {{eqderivprov|Determining Party}} incur in replacing the material terms of the {{eqderivprov|Transaction}} if, due to wars, sanctions and other miscellaneous geopolitical hanky-panky, a market gets totally shut down? If, for example, the outside world has imposed economic sanctions on the jurisdiction in which your {{eqderivprov|Share}}s trade (as, at the time of writing,<ref>Feburary 2022.</ref> seems far possible for Russia), of if the {{eqderivprov|Share}}s’ jurisdiction itself imposes sanctions on money coming in from or going out to the outside world (as did Greece, for a brief moment, in 2015)?
@@ Line 10: / Line 8: @@
 Now the nature of geopolitical events is to be unpredictable. They may manifest themselves in different and unexpected ways, so — while no-one likes to rag on {{icds}} more than the [[JC]] does, readers, you know that — you can’t really blame [[the ’squad]] for not setting out the myriad of unintended knock-on consequences there might be to your equity derivative portfolio as a result of an unwarranted military incursion in the Urals.
+====Talk to your clients====
-That said, it is all about managing expectations. The other typical characteristic of geopolitical hanky-panky is that it rarely comes out of the blue: it brews, there is posturing, brinkspersonship, manoeuvering before anything happens. ''This is a good time to get out and talk to your clients''. Remember the name of the game is to manage client expectations: a client who ''didn’t'' know it had some risk, even though it ''should'' have known (or, in fact ''did'' know<ref>This is an [[unknown known]] in the JC’s [[forensic epistemology]].</ref>) is more likely to be upset when that risk materialises than one who ''did'' know, because you reminded it. Your goal is not to ''win'' [[litigation]] over [[boilerplate]] terms in your contracts, but ''avoid'' it.
+That said, it is all about managing expectations. The other typical characteristic of geopolitical hanky-panky is that it rarely comes out of the blue: it brews, there is posturing, brinkspersonship, manoeuvering before anything happens. ''This is a good time to get out and talk to your clients''. Remember the name of the game is to manage client expectations: a client who ''didn’t'' know it had some risk, even though it ''should'' have known (or, in fact ''did'' know<ref>This is an [[unknown known]] in the JC’s [[forensic epistemology]].</ref> but in a moment of motivated irrationality had conveniently ''forgotten'') is more likely to be upset when that risk materialises than one who ''did'' know, because you reminded it. [[Your goal is not to win litigation but avoid it|Your goal, remember, is not to ''win'' litigation with your customers, but ''avoid'' it]].