Template:M comp disc 2002 ISDA Specified Transaction: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page with "===Different formulations between the versions=== A {{isdaprov|Specified Transaction}} under the {{1992ma}} is, by ISDA standards, monosyllabic to the point of being terse. U..."
 
No edit summary
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
===Different formulations between the versions===
{{isda Specified Transaction comp|isdaprov}}
A {{isdaprov|Specified Transaction}} under the {{1992ma}} is, by ISDA standards, monosyllabic to the point of being terse.
 
Under the {{2002ma}} it is expressed with far more of ISDA's signature sense of the Byzantine, expanding the basic definition to specifically include [[futures]] [[credit derivatives]], [[repo]], [[stock lending]], [[weather derivative]]s,<ref>Oh, look! Anyone remember {{tag|Enron}}? Anyone feeling nostalgic for the good old days when men were men, fraud was fraud, financial accountants were profit centres and anything seemed possible?</ref>  [[NDF]]s, transactions executed under terms of business and other commodities or similar transactions that is presently or in future becomes common in the financial markets.

Latest revision as of 19:12, 5 January 2024

A Specified Transaction under the 1992 ISDA is, by the standards of ISDA’s crack drafting squad™, monosyllabic to the point of being terse. But that is as nothing compared to the 1987 ISDA, which wasn’t even called a Specified Transaction, but was just a Specified Swap.

Under the 2002 ISDA, it is expressed with far more of the squad’s signature sense of derring-do and the Byzantine, expanding the basic definition:

  1. Oh, look! Anyone remember Enron? Anyone feeling nostalgic for the good old days when men were men, fraud was fraud, financial accountants were profit centres and anything seemed possible? No?