82,892
edits
Thirteenth law of worker entropy: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
Similarly, ''v'' is actual, real-world value, and not “notional fright-value imbued by the neurotic expostulations of paranoid lawyers”. ''v<sub>f</sub>'', we think, is a cosmological constant. | Similarly, ''v'' is actual, real-world value, and not “notional fright-value imbued by the neurotic expostulations of paranoid lawyers”. ''v<sub>f</sub>'', we think, is a cosmological constant. | ||
Thus, a [[Medium term note|secured medium term note]] — typically in the tens | Thus, a [[Medium term note|secured medium term note]] — typically in the tens or hundreds of millions of dollars inprincipal amount — has high intrinsic value even though the basic premise of a transaction — “I lend you money, you give me a an [[IOU]], I can sell it, you repay whoever holds it at maturity, with interest, depending on certain externalities” — is pretty simple. | ||
Thus, you can expect the documentation for a | Thus, you can expect the documentation for a bond deal to span several hundred pages of wretched text, and so it does, notwithstanding that one can, and parties typically do, trade on a one-page [[Cocktail napkin|term-sheet]]. | ||
[[Netting opinion|Netting opinions]] are the same: there has not been an insolvency practitioner on the planet in the last forty years who has for an instant considered challenging the “[[Single Agreement - ISDA Provision|single agreement]]” concept, which is not difficult to articulate — all our swaps net down to a single exposure, right? Yet, so ghastly are the dread phantoms that might alight should anyone ask that plainly stupid question — and so comfortable are the incomes of those brave thousands engaged in the annual harvest of prophylactic opinions giving a sensible answer— that the industry tolerates a multi-million dollar annual expenditure without a reflective thought. | [[Netting opinion|Netting opinions]] are the same: there has not been an insolvency practitioner on the planet in the last forty years who has for an instant considered challenging the “[[Single Agreement - ISDA Provision|single agreement]]” concept, which is not difficult to articulate — all our swaps net down to a single exposure, right? Yet, so ghastly are the dread phantoms that might alight should anyone ask that plainly stupid question — and so comfortable are the incomes of those brave thousands engaged in the annual harvest of prophylactic opinions giving a sensible answer— that the industry tolerates a multi-million dollar annual expenditure without a reflective thought. | ||