fabriziof
Forumer storico
appunto
Obbligazioni perpetue e subordinate Tutto quello che avreste sempre voluto sapere sulle obbligazioni perpetue... - Cap. 3
- Creatore Discussione Joe Silver
- Data di Inizio
Rottweiler
Forumer storico
capt.harlock
MENA IL CAMMELLO FAN CLUB
bid otc 73
cmq thanks
preso un rinforzino su lux a 73 adesso
mi dicono che otc non passano piu' a 75, nemmeno a 76
lloyds salite
https://www.boerse-stuttgart.de/rd/de/anleihen/factsheet?sSymbol=LLQC.STU&lang=de
Dandst
Forumer storico
NoWay
It's time to play the game
Ahhhhhhhh........ avevo visto che si era alzata... ora capisco perchè!
Scommessa call per entrambi?
capt.harlock
MENA IL CAMMELLO FAN CLUB
Ahhhhhhhh........ avevo visto che si era alzata... ora capisco perchè!
Scommessa call per entrambi?
si' , preferisco la lloyds ma adesso la rzb e' fuori prezzo rispetto alle altre t1 che sono salite del 10/15% dopo view jpm
le rzb dovrebbero stare, per fare un paragone con le altre, gia' vicino ad 80
Cat XL
Shizuka Minamoto
Ecco spiegato il rally... ne parliamo stasera con vate Rott...
Europe Credit Research
Tier I: Upgrade To Overweight: Tier I Not Eligible As Tier II Regulatory Capital
Click here for the full Alert and disclaimers.
·The clarification that legacy Tier I instruments will not be eligible as Tier II capital under transitional arrangements will be an undoubted positive for valuations as this will increase the certainty of call being exercised. Whereas previously our assumption was that the Tier I instruments would be eligible as Tier II capital, making the decision to call such instruments dependent on the relative cost of issuing Tier II capital instruments, the fact that the legacy Tier I instruments will not have any regulatory capital value will imply that it will merely be a question of comparing the post-call spread on the instrument versus the cost of senior funding. Under these circumstances, we assume that the issuers will have much lower incentives to maintain these instruments outstanding and as such, the certainty with regard to call has to increase. This would also be applicable for issuers such as DB which in the past have used economic rationale to justify the calling or not of Tier I instruments.
·As a result of the greater certainty with regard to the calling of Tier I instruments, we move to Overweight from Underweight on Tier I as an asset class, with the innovative structures having a much greater certainty of being called. This is due to the fact that the EBA has clarified that ‘For instruments with an incentive to redeem, Article 489 applies. As a general principle, instruments formerly issued with an incentive to redeem shall be eliminated from regulatory own funds at their effective maturity date (the first call date) if they do not fully comply with the criteria of Article 52 after the effective maturity date. The fact that the instrument is not called does not mean that the instrument may be reclassified as an instrument without an incentive to redeem. ’ We also think that this should be supportive for the pricing of non-innovative structures, as while these will not be fully derecognized at first call date and continue to benefit from grandfathering, we note that the decision to call will again will be benchmarked against the cost of senior funding rather than the cost of Tier II funding, as the transitional amortization reduces the effectiveness of such instruments.
·The EBA also clarifies in its Single Rulebook Q&A that due to the existence of the quarterly calls which the legacy Tier I instrument would have after the first call date, these instruments ‘would also not meet the eligibility criteria for inclusion in grandfathered Tier 2 capital as foreseen under Article 484 (5) of Regulation (EU) No 575/2013’. As a result, the EBA’s ruling would appear to be categorical in terms of the legacy Tier I instrument not being eligible as Tier II capital in their own right after they have been fully derecognized at the first call. As a result, we expect that Tier I will now trade to call due to the reduced utility it will have for issuers post the first call date for innovative structures.
Roberto Henriques, CFA
(44-20) 7134-1733
[email protected]
Alan Bowe
(44-20) 7134-1837
[email protected]
Axel J Finsterbusch
(44-20) 7134-4711
[email protected]
If you no longer wish to receive these e-mails then click here to unsubscribe
Da Morgan Stanley
Dandst
Forumer storico
Ahhhhhhhh........ avevo visto che si era alzata... ora capisco perchè!
Scommessa call per entrambi?
per me si
ask a 85
Ultima modifica:
claudioborghi
Twitter: @borghi_claudio
Ma soprattutto a me pare che a volte si dimentichi che un tasso variabile dieci anni non è un tasso variabile spot. Se un'emittente (e me ne sono accorto cercando i floater giapponesi - NB non sono riuscito a comperarli) emettesse a tasso variabile spot quasi flat se emettesse con indicizzazione a 10anni lo farebbe MENO enne bp. Sono incappato in un tot di IRS10y MENO 90 ecc ecc
Per me le postbank D.POSTBANK FDG TR.04/UND. (WKN A0DEN7, ISIN DE000A0DEN75) - Chart - ARIVA.DE sono appealing come il primo giorno che le vidi
NoWay
It's time to play the game
Certo che sono proprio un babbeo... ero lì che pensavo se prenderle e adesso Ask 85!!!
Similar threads
- Bloccata
Obbligazioni perpetue e subordinate
Tutto quello che avreste sempre voluto sapere sulle obbligazioni perpetue... - Cap. 2
- Bloccata
Obbligazioni perpetue e subordinate
Tutto quello che avreste sempre voluto sapere sulle obbligazioni perpetue... - Cap. 1
