|
|
(9 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| '''The {{isdama}}''' is the basic framework which applies to anyone who touches down on planet [[ISDA]]. There are three existing versions:
| | ===The {{isdama}}=== |
| | The {{isdama}} is the basic framework which applies to anyone who touches down on planet [[ISDA]]. There are three existing versions: |
| *the state-of-the-art '''{{2002ma}}''';<ref>There is no such thing as a '''{{2008ma}}'''. That was a joke on our part.</ref> | | *the state-of-the-art '''{{2002ma}}''';<ref>There is no such thing as a '''{{2008ma}}'''. That was a joke on our part.</ref> |
| *the still-popular-with-traditionalists-and-Americans '''{{1992ma}}''', and | | *the still-popular-with-traditionalists-and-Americans '''{{1992ma}}''', and |
| *the all-but-retired-but-don’t-forget-there-are-still-soldiers-in-the-Burmese-jungle '''{{1987ma}}'''<ref>Seriously: proceed with cuation with one of these. {{1987ma}}s don’t have a lot of safety features a modern derivatives counterparty relies on, so only for real specialists and weirdos. Think of it like flying a spitfire rather than a 737 Max. Um, okay, bad {{t|metaphor}}.</ref> | | *the all-but-retired-but-don’t-forget-there-are-still-soldiers-in-the-Burmese-jungle '''{{1987ma}}'''<ref>Seriously: proceed with caution with one of these. {{1987ma}}s don’t have a lot of safety features a modern derivatives counterparty relies on, so only for real specialists and weirdos. Think of it like flying a spitfire rather than a 737 Max. Um, okay, bad {{t|metaphor}}.</ref> |
| | | *the interesting-only-for-its-place-in-the-fossil-record-and-witty-acrostic {{1985ma}}; and |
| The {{isdama}} is a pre-printed pdf. You don’t, despite the [[Substance and form|darkest fears]] of your [[internal audit]] department, ever ''edit'' this document. ''Ever''. It’s generally a .pdf, so you can’t<ref>I know you ''can'', but you are forgetting about the general technical aptitude of your average ISDA [[negotiator]] who can’t figure out how to get goddamn tab stops to work.</ref> but, in any weather, you ''don’t''.<ref>“But what if we ''did''?” wails [[internal audit]]. How would you know? This is your chance to pull the [[exasperated Kermit face]]. It won’t help, of course, but you may feel better.</ref> You just don’t. You sign it as it is and then execute an ...
| | *there ''isn’t'' a '''{{2008ma}}'''. That’s a little running [[JC]] in-joke.<ref>Talking to yourself might not be the first sign of madness, but having ''in-jokes'' with yourself might be.</ref> |
| | | All three versions have a tri-partite form: '''Pre-printed Master''', '''{{{{{1}}}|Schedule}}''' and — well, ''this'' is controversial: for is it, or is it not, part of the {{isdama}}? — '''[[Credit Support Annex]]'''. |
| ... '''ISDA {{isdaprov|Schedule}}'''. This overlays the pre-printed master agreement. Here you specify {{isdaprov|Additional Termination Event}}s, add economic variables, names, addresses, add {{isdaprov|Tax Representations}} and ''then'', in Part 5, you are free to make any technical amendments your [[credit]] and [[legal]] [[Chicken licken|chicken lickens]] want [[for the avoidance of doubt]], and that you couldn't make because technical ineptitude and unerring market convention prevented you editing the preprinted master. That comprises your overarching {{isdama}}, though you may also have a ...
| |
| | |
| ...'''[[Credit support arrangement]]''' which is usually an annex to the {{isdama}}. In order to document a specific Transaction you will need a...
| |
| | |
| ... '''{{isdaprov|Confirmation}}''' is the thing that actually documents a specific swap {{isdaprov|Transaction}}, though there is sometimes an intermediate [[Master Confirmation Agreement]] which documents the generic terms for all, say [[equity derivative]] {{isdaprov|Transaction}}s.
| |