Template:Gmsla equivalence: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "Now here's a funny thing. In the {{2000gmsla}}, there were four defined terms relating to the assets and collateral that pass between the parties to a stock loan, all of them ..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Under the {{2010gmsla}}, by contrast there are three; two nouns and an adjective "{{eqderivprov|Securities}}", "{{gmslaprov|Collateral}}" and "{{gmslaprov|Equivalent}}". | Under the {{2010gmsla}}, by contrast there are three; two nouns and an adjective "{{eqderivprov|Securities}}", "{{gmslaprov|Collateral}}" and "{{gmslaprov|Equivalent}}". | ||
The difference | The difference being? Well, it's a neat linguistic one: | ||
: | :Under the {{gmsla2000}} - if you're the sort of person who gets upset about this kind of thing - to capture the concept of an asset or collateral under the loan whichever way it presently happens to be travelling, you would need to say "{{eqderivprov|Securities}} or {{eqderivprov|Equivalent Securities}}, as the case may be". | ||
:In the 2010 model, you can capture the same concept by saying "Securities" - because "Equivalent" Securities is not a distinct | :In the 2010 model, you can capture the same concept by saying "{{eqderivprov|Securities}}" - because "{{eqderivprov|Equivalent}}" {{eqderivprov|Securities}} is not a distinct category, but a subset of the first category. | ||
So, chapeau to those clever people at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer. | So, chapeau to those clever people at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer. | ||
Revision as of 18:30, 17 December 2015
Now here's a funny thing. In the 2000 GMSLA, there were four defined terms relating to the assets and collateral that pass between the parties to a stock loan, all of them nouns: "Securities", "Collateral", "Equivalent Securities" and "Equivalent Collateral".
Under the 2010 GMSLA, by contrast there are three; two nouns and an adjective "Securities", "Collateral" and "Equivalent".
The difference being? Well, it's a neat linguistic one:
- Under the Template:Gmsla2000 - if you're the sort of person who gets upset about this kind of thing - to capture the concept of an asset or collateral under the loan whichever way it presently happens to be travelling, you would need to say "Securities or Equivalent Securities, as the case may be".
- In the 2010 model, you can capture the same concept by saying "Securities" - because "Equivalent" Securities is not a distinct category, but a subset of the first category.
So, chapeau to those clever people at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer.