Template:M comp disc GMSLA 9: Difference between revisions

← Older edit

Template:M comp disc GMSLA 9 (view source)

Revision as of 16:55, 17 November 2020

802 bytes added , 17 November 2020

no edit summary

Amwelladmin

Bureaucrats, Interface administrators, Administrators

82,891

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{2010 GMSLA Section 9 TOC}}
-Paraghraph 9 of the {{gmdsla}} is broadly the same in the {{pgmsla}} only with no reference to failure by the {{pgmslaprov|Lender}} to return {{pgmslaprov|Equivalent}} {{pgmslaprov|Collateral}} for the sensible reason that, under the {{pgmsla}} construct, the {{pgmslaprov|Lender}} never gets its mitts on the {{pgmslaprov|Collateral}} in the first place, so is hardly in a position to fail to return it.
+Paragraph {{gmslaprov|9}} of the {{gmsla}} is broadly the same in the {{pgmsla}}, only with no reference to failure by the {{pgmslaprov|Lender}} to return {{pgmslaprov|Equivalent}} {{pgmslaprov|Collateral}}, all for the sensible reason that, under the {{pgmsla}} construct, the {{pgmslaprov|Lender}} never gets its mitts on the {{pgmslaprov|Collateral}} in the first place, so is hardly in a position to fail to return it.
+===Comparable master agreements===
+We are given to understand that neither the {{gmra}}, its American cousin the {{mra}} nor the American stock lending agreement the {{msla}} have comparable mini-close-out provisions, though it is understood as a matter of good form that where there has been a simple innocent settlement failure and one can safely [[buy in]] — thereby helping oneself — one would never be so vulgar or unsportspersonlike as to actually call an [[Event of Default]]. And the market seems cool with that — [[cognitive dissonance]] to the power of one — until it comes to worrying whether that will impact a cross-default under a neighbouring {{isdama}}, at which point the buyside market flips out — [[cognitive dissonance]] to the power of a ''trillion''.