Template:M comp disc 2002 ISDA Close-out Amount: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{isdacomparison}} | {{isdacomparison}} | ||
{{icds}} introduced the {{isdaprov|Close-out Amount}} into the {{2002ma}} to correct the total trainwreck of a close-out methodology set out in the {{1992ma}}. In the “good old days”, you valued {{isdaprov|Terminated Transaction}}s were valued according to {{isdaprov|Market Quotation}} or {{isdaprov|Loss}} and those un-intuitive and — well, flat-out ''nutso'' — “[[First Method - ISDA Provision|First]]” and “[[Second Method - ISDA Provision|Second ]]” Methods. | {{icds}} introduced the {{isdaprov|Close-out Amount}} into the {{2002ma}} to correct the total trainwreck of a close-out methodology set out in the {{1992ma}}. In the “good old days”, you valued {{isdaprov|Terminated Transaction}}s were valued according to {{isdaprov|Market Quotation}} or {{isdaprov|Loss}} and those un-intuitive and — well, flat-out ''nutso'' — “[[First Method - ISDA Provision|First]]” and “[[Second Method - ISDA Provision|Second]]” Methods. There is a “{{isda92prov|Settlement Amount}}” concept, but it only really relates to {{isda92prov|Market Quotation}}. | ||
Revision as of 12:38, 16 March 2020
See ISDA Comparison for a comparison between the 1992 ISDA and the 2002 ISDA.
ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ introduced the Close-out Amount into the 2002 ISDA to correct the total trainwreck of a close-out methodology set out in the 1992 ISDA. In the “good old days”, you valued Terminated Transactions were valued according to Market Quotation or Loss and those un-intuitive and — well, flat-out nutso — “First” and “Second” Methods. There is a “Settlement Amount” concept, but it only really relates to Market Quotation.