Loss - 1992 ISDA Provision: Difference between revisions

The “except, so as to avoid duplication” coda ''looks'' to be a magnificent piece of ISDA discombobulation, because at first blush there doesn’t seem any risk of duplication: the excluded paragraphs all deal exclusively with {{isdama]}s where  {{isdaprov|Market Quotation}}, and not {{isdaprov|Loss}}, applies. So this {{isdaprov|Loss}} definition seems entirely irrelevant ... until you notice that {{isdaprov|Settlement Amount}} used when valuing with Market Quotation defaults to {{isdaprov|Loss}}<ref>{{isdaprov|Loss}} ''not counting {{isdaprov|Unpaid Amounts}}'', that is — makes you weep doesn’t it?</ref> when, as most assuredly it will, {{isdaprov|Market Quotation}} turns out to be a totally impractical means of valuing a {{isdaprov|Terminated Transaction}}, since ''no-one will give you a price for a trade they can’t actually enter''.