Template:M summ Equity Derivatives 12.1(d): Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[12.1(d) - Equity Derivatives Provision|If]] you’re like the [[JC]] you will be wondering how a single holder could acquire ''more'' than 100 per cent of the extant {{eqderivprov|Shares}} of an {{eqderivprov|Issuer}}. But, to an [[ISDA ninja]], that | [[12.1(d) - Equity Derivatives Provision|If]] you’re like the [[JC]] you will be wondering how a single holder could acquire ''more'' than 100 per cent of the extant {{eqderivprov|Shares}} of an {{eqderivprov|Issuer}}. But, to an [[ISDA ninja]], that is to rather miss the point. We are not talking about the ''practical'', but the ''conceptually possible''. Perhaps in a [[parallel universe]], where normal rules of Euclidean geometry don’t apply. Or down a gravity well or something. | ||
Sleep assured that, however conceptually difficult — ''logically'' difficult — such a feat might be, if someone ''does'' manage it then {{icds}} has your — or her — back. | Sleep assured that, however conceptually difficult — ''logically'' difficult — such a feat might be, if someone ''does'' manage it then {{icds}} has your — or her — back. | ||
Latest revision as of 19:54, 3 August 2023
If you’re like the JC you will be wondering how a single holder could acquire more than 100 per cent of the extant Shares of an Issuer. But, to an ISDA ninja, that is to rather miss the point. We are not talking about the practical, but the conceptually possible. Perhaps in a parallel universe, where normal rules of Euclidean geometry don’t apply. Or down a gravity well or something.
Sleep assured that, however conceptually difficult — logically difficult — such a feat might be, if someone does manage it then ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ has your — or her — back.
Actually, come to think of it, they don’t, because an acquisition of more than 100% would not count as a Tender Offer at all.
Eheu. I suppose we had all better hope and that normal rules of Euclidean geometry continue to apply for the time being.
Also, is not clear what is meant to happen if the Tender Offer relates to exactly 100 per cent of the outstanding Shares.