Key information document: Difference between revisions

no edit summary
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 2: Line 2:


This is radical and, for an attorney, rather intimidating for, in the sainted history of financial law, neither of these things has ever been part of the enterprise of anyone drawing up offering materials. The basic purpose of offering documents has always been threefold:
This is radical and, for an attorney, rather intimidating for, in the sainted history of financial law, neither of these things has ever been part of the enterprise of anyone drawing up offering materials. The basic purpose of offering documents has always been threefold:
#To bury the intellectual technology — for which read, ''conceal the abject lack of it'' — underpinning any financial product so that no ''normal'' two-bit attorney (or, heaven forfend, ''[[muggle]]'') can therefore milk the overflowing trough, and only a ''securities lawyer'' can;
#To bury the intellectual technology — for which read, ''conceal the abject lack of it'' — underpinning any financial product so that no ''normal'' two-bit attorney (or, heaven forfend, some ghastly [[LPO]] ''[[muggle]]'') can therefore milk the overflowing trough, and only a ''[[securities lawyer]]'' can;
#To cover the issuer’s, arranger’s and, more importantly, their counsel’s posteriors against the risk of having neglected to advise of the inherent flaws, inefficiencies and perfidies of said financial product; and
#To cover the issuer’s, arranger’s and, more importantly, their counsel’s posteriors against the risk of having neglected to advise of the inherent flaws, inefficiencies and perfidies of said financial product; and
#generally to baffle [[and/or]] [[Tedium|bore]] any investor [[and/or]] regulator sufficiently close to exasperation to stop it asking questions.
#generally to baffle [[and/or]] [[Tedium|bore]] any investor [[and/or]] regulator sufficiently close to exasperation to stop it asking questions.