82,891
edits
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{a|people| | {{a|people| | ||
[[File:Hilux.jpeg|450px|thumb|center|Deal counsel yesterday]] | [[File:Hilux.jpeg|450px|thumb|center|Deal counsel yesterday]] | ||
}}There is a Rake’s Progress of attorney from [[private practice lawyer]] to [[inhouse counsel]] to [[structurer]] (with sickly branches peeling off towards [[human resources]] and [[head-hunter]] | }}There is a Rake’s Progress of attorney from [[private practice lawyer]] to [[inhouse counsel]] to [[structurer]] (with sickly branches peeling off towards [[human resources]] and [[head-hunter]]).<ref>Whether those latter feeble strands are some kind of nascent [[Evolution|Darwinian evolution]] we are witnessing in real-time, or simply a descent into decadent madness, is a question on which the different constituents have their own opinions</ref> | ||
Only the stoutest stay put. Those who do — who don’t evolve, or adapt, but keep within their darkened partnerships, thriving in that gloomy cove, are a tough breed. | |||
Lawyers may be obliged by entry-barrier perpetuating regulations to maintain [[professional indemnity insurance]] but their no-claims bonus is safe. Even when it all goes [[pear-shaped]] — deals like this often do — it will be impossible to trace that failing back to them: | They are like cockroaches — or, more flatteringly, [[Toyota Hilux]]es — they will do whatever you ask, and will just keep going until you tell them to stop. The more [[tedious]], the more compendious, the more laden with unmanageable complexity, the better. They may not sleep for three days; their complexions may take on a clammy green sheen, they may subsist on tea, pizza and prescription amphetamines, but ''they will endure'', their massive command of structural and documentational complexity intact. | ||
Lawyers may be obliged, by entry-barrier perpetuating regulations, to maintain [[professional indemnity insurance]] but their no-claims bonus is safe. Even when it all goes [[pear-shaped]] — deals like this often do — it will be impossible to trace that failing back to them: how could anyone, not across that whole body of information, hope to? The germ of dissolution, if it is their fault, will be so deeply buried in some third side-letter to the series proposal for the fourth tranche of the mezzanine financing leg that no-one else has a hope of ''finding'' it, let alone seeing it for the smoking gun it purportedly is. | |||
'''''Will'' say''': “This time-line is very aggressive. We don’t have ''time'' for a term-sheet: [[Let’s go straight to docs]].”<br> | '''''Will'' say''': “This time-line is very aggressive. We don’t have ''time'' for a term-sheet: [[Let’s go straight to docs]].”<br> | ||
'''''Won’t'' say''': “Seems fine to me. No comments.” | '''''Won’t'' say''': “Seems fine to me. No comments.” | ||
===The loss of [[subject matter expert]]ise=== | ===The loss of [[subject matter expert]]ise=== | ||
The sainted history of the [[eye-ess-dee-aye]], and how its carriage has descended through the ranks of solemn wizardry to its present low state, pushed about by school leavers in failed communist states is recounted in our [[downgrading]] article. The negotiation of standard master agreements — especially the securities financing ones — has now passed so far down the “value chain” that private practice lawyers are positively destructive to the negotiation process, having none of the “[[metis]]” required to competently advise. It is amusing, but alarming, when apparently sophisticated [[asset manager]]s [[Outsourcing|outsource]] their contract negotiation to [[Law firm|second-tier law firms]] anxious (late in the day) to get a piece of the derivatives action, who then resolutely bugger everything up for everyone else, not understanding foundational, if counterintuitive, aspects of the market, insisting on [[indemnities]], [[close-out]]s for run-of-the-mill settlement failures, and to reserve rights to seek replacement costs and even [[consequential loss]]es way of damages for non-performance under [[stock loan]]s. | The sainted history of the [[eye-ess-dee-aye]], and how its carriage has descended through the ranks of solemn wizardry to its present low state, pushed about by school leavers in failed communist states is recounted in our [[downgrading]] article. The negotiation of standard master agreements — especially the securities financing ones — has now passed so far down the “value chain” that private practice lawyers are positively destructive to the negotiation process, having none of the “[[metis]]” required to competently advise on them. This will not stop them trying. | ||
It is amusing, but alarming, when apparently sophisticated [[asset manager]]s [[Outsourcing|outsource]] their contract negotiation to [[Law firm|second-tier law firms]] anxious (late in the day) to get a piece of the derivatives action, who then resolutely bugger everything up for everyone else, not understanding foundational, if counterintuitive, aspects of the market, insisting on [[indemnities]], [[close-out]]s for run-of-the-mill settlement failures, and to reserve rights to seek replacement costs and even [[consequential loss]]es way of damages for non-performance under [[stock loan]]s. | |||
Folks: if it hiring a [[negotiator]] knock out your [[GMRA]]s seems extravagant, getting a trainee at [[Tubb Fuller Breaden Potter Bacon]] to have a go at £200/hr is positively prodigal. Especially since she won’t have a Scooby-Doo what she’s doing. | Folks: if it hiring a [[negotiator]] knock out your [[GMRA]]s seems extravagant, getting a trainee at [[Tubb Fuller Breaden Potter Bacon]] to have a go at £200/hr is positively prodigal. Especially since she won’t have a Scooby-Doo what she’s doing. |