Template:M summ Equity Derivatives 12.1: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) Created page with "===All hail the {{eqderivprov|Determining Party}}=== Note that where an {{eqderivprov|Extraordinary Event}} occurs, the {{eqderivprov|Determining Party}}, rather than the {{eq..." |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
===All hail the {{eqderivprov|Determining Party}}=== | ===All hail the {{eqderivprov|Determining Party}}=== | ||
Note that where an {{eqderivprov|Extraordinary Event}} occurs, the {{eqderivprov|Determining Party}}, rather than the {{eqderivprov|Calculation Agent}}, may be the person called on to calculate a {{eqderivprov|Cancellation Amount}}. (This is relevant especially where the {{eqderivprov|Calculation Agent}} is not the {{eqderivprov|Hedging Party}}, as the {{eqderivprov|Hedging Party}} will have definite ideas about how to value cancellation vis a vis its own hedge). | Note that where an {{eqderivprov|Extraordinary Event}} occurs, the {{eqderivprov|Determining Party}}, rather than the {{eqderivprov|Calculation Agent}}, may be the person called on to calculate a {{eqderivprov|Cancellation Amount}}. (This is relevant especially where the {{eqderivprov|Calculation Agent}} is not the {{eqderivprov|Hedging Party}}, as the {{eqderivprov|Hedging Party}} will have definite ideas about how to value cancellation vis a vis its own hedge). | ||
==={{eqderivprov|Share for Share}}=== | |||
Is it just is or did {{icds}} hit the wall on the definition of {{eqderivprov|Share for Share}}? What do you mean “and (ii) {{eqderivprov|Reverse Merger}}”? It ''looks like'' something is missing, but we think the rather exasperated tone is basically, “a reverse merger is necessarily {{eqderivprov|Share-for-Share}} so do we really nned to “wrap it round with deemery”, as {{Buchstein}} would say? Well, we are jolly well not going to, so see how you like that.” | |||
Revision as of 14:31, 12 May 2022
All hail the Determining Party
Note that where an Extraordinary Event occurs, the Determining Party, rather than the Calculation Agent, may be the person called on to calculate a Cancellation Amount. (This is relevant especially where the Calculation Agent is not the Hedging Party, as the Hedging Party will have definite ideas about how to value cancellation vis a vis its own hedge).
Is it just is or did ISDA’s crack drafting squad™ hit the wall on the definition of Share for Share? What do you mean “and (ii) Reverse Merger”? It looks like something is missing, but we think the rather exasperated tone is basically, “a reverse merger is necessarily Share-for-Share so do we really nned to “wrap it round with deemery”, as Büchstein would say? Well, we are jolly well not going to, so see how you like that.”