Undead ISDA: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*{{isdaprov|Early Termination}} under the {{isdama}} | |||
*[[No-fault termination]] | |||
*The [[Good Man]] | *The [[Good Man]] | ||
*The [[Dark Lord of the Swaps]] | *The [[Dark Lord of the Swaps]] |
Revision as of 14:32, 28 November 2019
The status of every defunct ISDA master agreement, once all transactions have terminated, whether through the exigencies of a stressed close-out, or simply through the entropy and general lassitude of a modern life in which many former devotees of the ISDA creed grew bored, or adversely regulated, and gave up on swaps, once the last live ones have all rolled off.
For while you can terminate a Transaction under an ISDA Master Agreement the printed form does not envisage one terminating the master agreement itself. It has no general termination on notice provisions so, unless you and your counterparty specifically confect to agree one, a discarded ISDA arrangement will lie there mute, transfixed, plastered to the infinite like some ghostly figure frozen at the event horizon of a black hole for ever — surviving, indefinitely, some believe even beyond the expiry of the very entities whose trading relationship it once described.
Some would say this is a non-point, as un-alive as the ISDA that presents it. For an ISDA under which there are no extant transactions carries no material financial obligations. But that Cross Default clause... could it ... ?
But even they who so haughtily wave concerns away yet still go quiet and will speak not of the Dark Lord.
See also
- Early Termination under the ISDA Master Agreement
- No-fault termination
- The Good Man
- The Dark Lord of the Swaps