Template:Isda 6(d) summ

Section {{{{{1}}}|6(d)}} is to do with working out the termination value of {{{{{1}}}|Transaction}}s for which you’ve just designated an {{{{{1}}}|Early Termination Date}}: in the 1992 ISDA using Loss and Market Quotation, and all that Second Method malarkey, and in the 2002 ISDA the much neater and tidier {{{{{1}}}|Close-out Amount}} concept.

Generally, this is good fat-tail paranoia material, so once upon a time parties used to negotiate it heavily. General SME-drain from the negotiation talent pool over the years due to vigorous down-skilling means people are less fussed about it now.

A popular parlour game among those pedants who still insist on using the 1992 ISDA — or, in fairness, are forced to by some other pedant further up their chain, or a general institutional disposition towards pedantry — 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 {{{{{1}}}|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 {{{{{1}}}|Failure to Pay}} (three days in the 1992 ISDA versus one in the 2002 ISDA) and {{{{{1}}}|Bankruptcy}} (thirty days in the 1992 ISDA versus 15 in the 2002 ISDA) in which case, you’d retrofit longer grace periods into the new version, wouldn’t you? But no).