Template:M summ 2002 ISDA 6(d)

From The Jolly Contrarian
Revision as of 12:24, 13 March 2020 by Amwelladmin (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This clause has nothing to do with grace periods and everything to do with working out the termination value of Transactions for which you’ve just designated an Early Termination Date - in the 1992 ISDA using Loss and Market Quotation, and all that Second Method malarkey (in the 2002 ISDA thje much neater and tidier Close-out Amount concept. This is good fat tail paranoia material, so expect to see it modified.

A popular parlour game among those pedants who still insist on using the 1992 ISDA[1] is to laboriously upgrade every inconsistent provision in the 1992 ISDA to the 2002 ISDA standard except the one provision of the 1992 ISDA they always liked — if the pedant is in question is from the Treasury department, that will be the longer grace period in the Failure to Pay; if she is from Credit, it absolutely won’t be.

You might well ask why anyone would be so bloody-minded, but then you might well ask why anybody watches films from the Fast and Furious franchise. Because they can.

Or, possibly, to preserve the slightly more generous grace periods for Failure to Pay[2] and Bankruptcy[3] (in which case, you’d retrofit longer grace periods into the new version, wouldn’t you? But no).

  1. ↑ Or, in fairness, are forced to by some other pedant further up their chain, or a general institutional disposition towards pedantry.
  2. ↑ Three days in the 1992 ISDA versus one in the 2002 ISDA.
  3. ↑ Thirty days in the 1992 ISDA versus 15 in the 2002 ISDA.
Retrieved from "https://jollycontrarian.com/index.php?title=Template:M_summ_2002_ISDA_6(d)&oldid=41200"