Terms of business: Difference between revisions

Terms of business (view source)

752 bytes removed , 10 December 2020

no edit summary

82,891

edits

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 ===EMEA===
 In EMEA, [[broker]]s do tend to have written [[terms of business]], if for no other reason because [[MiFID]] 2 imposes quite a lot of basic requirements that they need to memorialise.
-===The Simmons TOBS offensive===
+===The [[Simmons TOBS offensive]]===
-Each time [[ESMA]] updates [[MiFID]] dear old [[Simmons & Simmons]] kicks off a really hilarious<ref>Like ''really'' hilarious. I can’t tell you how fun it is.</ref> game where they gee their institutional [[asset manager]] clients up into a frenzy about how outrageous their [[broker]]s’ [[terms of business]] are, and present them with a nineteen-page generic letter of rebuttal. This precipitates a 9 month attritional paper war which is redolent of — and about as much of a waste of time, effort and young lives as — the [[Belgian dentist|Belgian]] trenches in World War I.
+{{simmons tobs offensive}}
-In fairness, many [[broker]]s don’t help themselves with their completely absurd [[terms of business]]. The longer ones check in at something like 80 pages. The shortest ones are three or four.
 And all of this goes before we even get into arguments about whether we need a [[sovereign immunity]] waiver clause or to appoint a [[process agent]].
 {{ref}}