Template:Options and flawed assets: 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: | ||
Once paid, you have no further ''obligations'' under the {{euaprov|Transaction}}, just the right — confitional on the option being in the money — to be paid on exercise. This can make matters interesting should your [[swap dealer]] decide to play ''[[Um alberne kerle zu spielen]]'' with the [[flawed asset]] provisions in your ISDA — though, newsflash: it ''won’t'', as long as its risk team retains possession of their deliberative faculties — but that won’t stop the negotiation community obsessing about how to cater for the contingency that they do not. | Once paid, you have no further ''obligations'' under the {{euaprov|Transaction}}, just the right — confitional on the option being in the money — to be paid on exercise. This can make matters interesting should your [[swap dealer]] decide to play ''[[Um alberne kerle zu spielen]]'' with the [[flawed asset]] provisions in your ISDA — though, newsflash: it ''won’t'', as long as its risk team retains possession of their deliberative faculties — but that won’t stop the negotiation community obsessing about how to cater for the contingency that they do not. | ||
For bookish types, there is a lengthy disquisition about it in the “ | <span class="plainlinks">For bookish types, there is a lengthy disquisition about it in the “[https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Section_2(a)(iii)_-_ISDA_Provision#Non-payment_delivery_defaults details]” section of our article on Section {{isdaprov|2(a)(iii)}}.</span> | ||
Revision as of 09:53, 17 April 2023
Once paid, you have no further obligations under the Transaction, just the right — confitional on the option being in the money — to be paid on exercise. This can make matters interesting should your swap dealer decide to play Um alberne kerle zu spielen with the flawed asset provisions in your ISDA — though, newsflash: it won’t, as long as its risk team retains possession of their deliberative faculties — but that won’t stop the negotiation community obsessing about how to cater for the contingency that they do not.
For bookish types, there is a lengthy disquisition about it in the “details” section of our article on Section 2(a)(iii).