Template:M comp disc 2002 ISDA 5(b)(v): Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
Replaced content with "{{isda Credit Event Upon Merger comp|isdaprov}}"
Tag: Replaced
Line 1: Line 1:
{{ISDAnumberingdiscrepancy}} - Section {{isdaprov|5(a)(viii)}} is {{isdaprov|Merger Without Assumption}}.
{{isda Credit Event Upon Merger comp|isdaprov}}
 
==={{1992ma}} upgrade===
Even before the {{2002ma}} was published it was common to upgrade the {{1992ma}} formulation to something resembling the glorious concoction that became Section {{isdaprov|5(b)(v)}} of the {{2002ma}}. The 1992 wording is a bit lame, really. See the panel below right for a snapshot of the difference
 
On the other hand, you could count the number of times an {{isdama}} is closed out on account of {{isdaprov|Credit Event Upon Merger}} on the fingers of one hand, even if you had lost all the fingers on that hand to an industrial accident. So — yeah.

Revision as of 22:23, 13 October 2023

Redlines


Discussion

First established in the 1987 ISDA, CEUM was gently upgraded for the 1992 ISDA to include Credit Support Providers and Specified Entities, and to clarify who, upon such a merger, is the Affected Party, as per this comparison.

It then had quite the overhaul of Credit Event Upon Merger between 1992 ISDA and 2002 ISDA as this comparison illustrates.

Designated Event is part of the definition of Credit Event Upon Merger in the 2002 ISDA, and doesn’t have an equivalent in the 1992 ISDA nor, obviously enough,the 1987 ISDA.

The 2002 ISDA introduced the “Designated Event” in an attempt to define more forensically the sorts of corporate events that should be covered by CEUM. They are notoriously difficult to pin down. Even before the 2002 ISDA was published, it was common to upgrade the 1992 ISDA formulation to something resembling the glorious concoction that became Section 5(b)(v) of the 2002 ISDA. The 1992 wording is a bit lame. On the other hand, you could count the number of times an ISDA Master Agreement is closed out purely on account of Credit Event Upon Merger on the fingers of one hand, even if you had lost all the fingers on that hand to an industrial accident.

So — yeah.