Template:M summ Equity Derivatives 1: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
This is dreadful, leaden literature — but everyone has sort of put up with it, and got used to it. They were meant to be superseded, in 2011, by the [[2011 Equity Derivatives Definitions]], thrillingly written by a squadron of [[chatbot]]s from [[Linklaters]] in bang-up-to-date, state-of-the-art, super duper hi-tech [[Financial products Markup Language]], but — well, every one still uses the stupid old 2002 versions. The [[JC]] being in the first rank a pragmatist, you will find little information here about the newer booklet — other than the odd wry remark about the [[Hindenburg]], and the mortal scarring to those poor folk at [[Linklaters]] who wrote the damn things, but plenty about the ghastly old {{2002equitydefs}} — a whole [[Equity Derivatives Anatomy|anatomy]] dedicated to that — seeing as that is what everyone still uses.
[[1 - Equity Derivatives Provision|If]] you are looking for literature to broaden your earthly perspective, or shine a torch into the dark crevices of the human condition, the {{eqdefs}} might not be the first volume you would pull off the shelf, but in its own way, in its Escheresque self-referencing reflexivity, it affords us an oblique perspective on the motivations of those who operate in the strange demi-monde of the international capital markets.  


In any case bunch these definitions into the following subgroups:
Commonplaces of the sort any mug knows instinctively without needing to be told are said, said, and said again; abstrusities about which even the ''cognoscenti'' might like more elucidation like what counts as a “{{eqderivprov|Dividend}}are left tantalisingly under-determined. Some parts the calculation of {{eqderivprov|Dividend Amount}} — just don’t work at all, so the market has resorted to its own organic means of resolution (the [[JC]] has its own suggestions, too see [[Dividend Amount - Equity Derivatives Provision|here]]).
*{{eqderivprov|Transactions}} Sections {{eqderivprov|1.1}} - {{eqderivprov|1.12}}
*{{eqderivprov|Underliers}} — Sections {{eqderivprov|1.13}} - {{eqderivprov|1.16}}
*{{eqderivprov|Trade Details}} Sections {{eqderivprov|1.17}} - {{eqderivprov|1.24}}
*{{eqderivprov|Exchanges, Clearing Systems and Currencies}} Sections {{eqderivprov|1.25}} - {{eqderivprov|1.37}}
*{{eqderivprov|Trade Features}} — Sections {{eqderivprov|1.38}} - {{eqderivprov|1.51}}

Latest revision as of 22:43, 5 August 2023

If you are looking for literature to broaden your earthly perspective, or shine a torch into the dark crevices of the human condition, the 2002 ISDA Equity Derivatives Definitions might not be the first volume you would pull off the shelf, but in its own way, in its Escheresque self-referencing reflexivity, it affords us an oblique perspective on the motivations of those who operate in the strange demi-monde of the international capital markets.

Commonplaces of the sort any mug knows instinctively without needing to be told are said, said, and said again; abstrusities about which even the cognoscenti might like more elucidation — like what counts as a “Dividend” — are left tantalisingly under-determined. Some parts — the calculation of Dividend Amount — just don’t work at all, so the market has resorted to its own organic means of resolution (the JC has its own suggestions, too — see here).