ingsilvio
Nuovo forumer
Ma allora secondo te se un paese è o non in default è lo stesso?
Titoli di Stato area Euro GRECIA Operativo titoli di stato - Cap. 2
- Creatore Discussione tommy271
- Data di Inizio
- Stato
fenox
Forumer storico
sofistico...
robinson
Forumer storico
alla grecia tutto interessa relativamente, vero.
Ma all' UE invece dovrebbe interessare; per ciò che succede al portogallo ecc...
siamo all' atteggiamento che la UE se ne sta' lavando le mani e lascia la responsabilità nelle sole mani greche.
MA IO MI CHIEDO: E' VERAMENTE COSI' ????????????
Cosa c'è di vero e cosa ancora è tattica (ad esempio per forzare una alta adesione allo swap?)
Ultima modifica:
tommy271
Forumer storico
Per la Grecia non penso cambi granchè ... come ripeto l'importante è assicurarsi i 130 MLD (ed oltre) di cui 50 MLD andranno alle banche elleniche.
Poi che sia default, selective default o quant'altro è solo una questione "nominalistica".
Il conto lo paghiamo noi ... non la Grecia.
Ultima modifica:
fenox
Forumer storico
beh questa opinione è proprio difficile da condividere..se la grecia fa default i flussi di liquidità (peraltro su conti controllati) va a farsi benedire un secondo dopo
giub
New Membro
ma dimmi, se anche il PSI+ ha successo, se il retail viene salvato, se non vengono attivate le CAC, se non c'è il D...secondo te le banche si fiderebbero a comprare Portogallo, dopo che dei GGB gli restituiscono 22/100?
discipline
Guest
Essendo prematuro pensare già a come spendere il possibile guadagno, meglio approfondire alcuni punti della proposta di swap, un commento (a mio avviso interessante quanto condivisibile) di un utente sul blog più volte citato (http://andreaskoutras.blogspot.com/2012/02/psi-prospectus-is-out.html):
AnonymousFeb 27, 2012 08:13 AM
After reading the prospectus, in my view it's absolutely clear that the application of CAC on existing bonds (as defined by the law approved last week) has not yet been decided and will definitely not be automatic.
Even if the section about minimum participation condition - with the 3 categories >90%, 75-90%, <75% may be misleading - they're effectively keeping the option open and this is clear from several passages of the text:
A) on page 14 it's clear that the amendments are subject to (i) the law-prescribed minimum tresholds and (ii) the Republic DECIDES to put the proposed Amendments (=CAC) in effect. So the Republic may DECIDE not to do so, after the agreement
B) also on page 14, it's also clearly stated that the Republic may choose to apply CACs to some or all of the Designated Security. This means that they may decide to apply CACs only on certain bonds and not on others. This clause also specifies that CACs will not be punitive (will receieve the Consideration and the Accrued Interest Payment according to same terms as the Offer)
C) the minimum participation condition described from page 21 onwards is related to the exchange offer and not to the proposed amendments (=CAC)
D) on page 48 there's a specific clause regulating the possibility to repurchase the old bonds that remain outstanding after the exchange. It specifically says that the terms of any subsequent offer / purchase /exchange may be different ftrom the terms of this invitation. If they apply CAC....there would be no remaining outstanding title
E) on page 81, among risks for investors NOT participating to the invitations, they list the uncertainty on trading exchange for remaining outsanding old bonds: liquidity will decrease and market will be thinner (which means they'll still be traded)
F) on page 82 it's clear that those who do NOT participate in the invitation will be bound only IF proposed Amendments are declared effective. And it refers back to the principle listed in A) above, that is a DECISIOn by the Republic
G) on page 85 the authority to buy back in open market or in privately negotiated transactions the Old Bonds that remain outstanding is re-iterated
All in all, in my view this means that all games are still open. The final outcome for retail investors will only be known after the exchange is completed (if they reach at least 75%) based on acceptance ratio AND political will - as usual with this Greek tragedy.
Would you agree with this view? What's the probability that this CAC story is going to be just a bluff?
Thanks
Teo
Ps to be noted that reaching 75% of the debt AFTER deducting 50+ bn exchanged by BCE means less than 60% than the original amount. Hopefully Dallar had at least these bonds under control....
ReplyDelete
Replies
AnonymousFeb 27, 2012 08:13 AM
After reading the prospectus, in my view it's absolutely clear that the application of CAC on existing bonds (as defined by the law approved last week) has not yet been decided and will definitely not be automatic.
Even if the section about minimum participation condition - with the 3 categories >90%, 75-90%, <75% may be misleading - they're effectively keeping the option open and this is clear from several passages of the text:
A) on page 14 it's clear that the amendments are subject to (i) the law-prescribed minimum tresholds and (ii) the Republic DECIDES to put the proposed Amendments (=CAC) in effect. So the Republic may DECIDE not to do so, after the agreement
B) also on page 14, it's also clearly stated that the Republic may choose to apply CACs to some or all of the Designated Security. This means that they may decide to apply CACs only on certain bonds and not on others. This clause also specifies that CACs will not be punitive (will receieve the Consideration and the Accrued Interest Payment according to same terms as the Offer)
C) the minimum participation condition described from page 21 onwards is related to the exchange offer and not to the proposed amendments (=CAC)
D) on page 48 there's a specific clause regulating the possibility to repurchase the old bonds that remain outstanding after the exchange. It specifically says that the terms of any subsequent offer / purchase /exchange may be different ftrom the terms of this invitation. If they apply CAC....there would be no remaining outstanding title
E) on page 81, among risks for investors NOT participating to the invitations, they list the uncertainty on trading exchange for remaining outsanding old bonds: liquidity will decrease and market will be thinner (which means they'll still be traded)
F) on page 82 it's clear that those who do NOT participate in the invitation will be bound only IF proposed Amendments are declared effective. And it refers back to the principle listed in A) above, that is a DECISIOn by the Republic
G) on page 85 the authority to buy back in open market or in privately negotiated transactions the Old Bonds that remain outstanding is re-iterated
All in all, in my view this means that all games are still open. The final outcome for retail investors will only be known after the exchange is completed (if they reach at least 75%) based on acceptance ratio AND political will - as usual with this Greek tragedy.
Would you agree with this view? What's the probability that this CAC story is going to be just a bluff?
Thanks
Teo
Ps to be noted that reaching 75% of the debt AFTER deducting 50+ bn exchanged by BCE means less than 60% than the original amount. Hopefully Dallar had at least these bonds under control....
ReplyDelete
Replies
-
AnonymousFeb 27, 2012 08:26 AM
Add to this the option that the Republic reserves for itself to withdraw the invitation for one or more bonds, including retrospectively for the bonds that have been already voted (page 35, paragraph d). So essentially the whole voting scheme is a sham. The outcome will be determined centrally, politically.
Ultima modifica di un moderatore:
forzaroma
Forumer attivo
All' europa serviva dare la sensazione, all'opinione pubblica, di aver fatto tutto per salvare degli irresponsabili ed incapaci. Tutto questo sulla carta, visto che sapevano perfettamente da almeno 10 anni che la grecia non avrebbe mai potuto onorare i propri debiti ma evidentemente serviva "fare melina", questo ovviamente con la collaborazione delle società di rating (sempre loro, sic!!!) che come al solito hanno fatto crollare il giudizio da A a c in due anni.
L'amara verità è che l'economia/finanza ed il gioco delle 3 carte sono la stessa cosa.
- Stato
Similar threads
