Kain
Forumer attivo
Hey eppure mi conosci, un po' di credito me lo potrai anche dare, sai che ho sempre un occhio alle news. Certi account Twitter mi danno la notifica a ogni Tweet. Quello che ti sto dicendo è la realtà.
Titoli di Stato paesi-emergenti VENEZUELA e Petroleos de Venezuela - Cap. 2
- Creatore Discussione tommy271
- Data di Inizio
tommy271
Forumer storico
Non dico nulla.
Tra l'altro Gonzales non gode buona stima sui forum tedeschi (io lo leggo sempre con attenzione).
Kain
Forumer attivo
Ma è sempre uno dei primi ad avere le news
tommy271
Forumer storico
E' molto presente ed attivo.
Ottoecinquanta
Forumer attivo
Oliveros mi sembra molto equilibrato nonostante sia chiaramente in disaccordo col governo in quanto a politica economica, Gonzales e Grisanti post swap col dente avvelenato. Rodriguez sempre numero uno a mio avviso
tommy271
Forumer storico
Técnicos del BCV cuestionan crédito de CAF al gobierno de Maduro
Dic 15, 2017 8:52 am
Un grupo de técnicos del BCV criticaron el préstamo concedido esta semana por la CAF al gobierno de Maduro.
Por lapatilla.com
El préstamo consistente en una línea de crédito por $ 400 millones se otorgó “sin que se haya evaluado el empleo de esos fondos, por lo que es altamente cuestionable en un contexto en el cual no hay cambios en la política económica que aplica el gobierno de Maduro” aseguraron
“Las autoridades de CAF no pueden despilfarrar recursos colectivos con créditos sin sentido económico”, afirmó uno de los técnicos del BCV a lapatilla.com
“Venezuela no está en condiciones de honrar ese compromiso” agregó.
Igualmente explican que la deuda pública es insostenible debido a que hay muchos bonos que están en default y por tanto carece de lógica financiera seguir tomando créditos que luego son una carga para el fisco al no generar ingresos para pagar.
Finalmente, argumentan que el presidente designado del BCV, Ramón Lobo no tiene cualidad para suscribir ese préstamo debido a que su designación fue ilegal por cuanto no cumple los requisitos para ser presidente del BCV.
“Una persona nombrada mediante un fraude legal, no puede representar a la nación en un empréstito. Por esto, ese crédito es ilegal” remataron.
***
Parole molto "forti", chissà se escono realmente dal BCV.
Dic 15, 2017 8:52 am
Un grupo de técnicos del BCV criticaron el préstamo concedido esta semana por la CAF al gobierno de Maduro.
Por lapatilla.com
El préstamo consistente en una línea de crédito por $ 400 millones se otorgó “sin que se haya evaluado el empleo de esos fondos, por lo que es altamente cuestionable en un contexto en el cual no hay cambios en la política económica que aplica el gobierno de Maduro” aseguraron
“Las autoridades de CAF no pueden despilfarrar recursos colectivos con créditos sin sentido económico”, afirmó uno de los técnicos del BCV a lapatilla.com
“Venezuela no está en condiciones de honrar ese compromiso” agregó.
Igualmente explican que la deuda pública es insostenible debido a que hay muchos bonos que están en default y por tanto carece de lógica financiera seguir tomando créditos que luego son una carga para el fisco al no generar ingresos para pagar.
Finalmente, argumentan que el presidente designado del BCV, Ramón Lobo no tiene cualidad para suscribir ese préstamo debido a que su designación fue ilegal por cuanto no cumple los requisitos para ser presidente del BCV.
“Una persona nombrada mediante un fraude legal, no puede representar a la nación en un empréstito. Por esto, ese crédito es ilegal” remataron.
***
Parole molto "forti", chissà se escono realmente dal BCV.
Ventodivino
מגן ולא יראה
.
Dal Circolo Gulati :
About That Mysterious Crystallex Settlement
posted by Mark Weidemaier
We have covered Crystallex’s lawsuit against Venezuela a bunch here on Credit Slips (for example, here, here, here, here, and here). In late November, the parties reached a settlement, shortly before a December 5 hearing on Crystallex’s alter ego claims and PDVSA’s cross motion to dismiss. A ruling in Crystallex’s favor would have let it look to PDVSA’s assets to satisfy its judgment against the government. As noted in the Financial Times, a pro-Crystallex ruling might also have had broader implications, potentially letting “holders of defaulted Venezuelan sovereign bonds also to seek to seize PDVSA assets, potentially including those of Citgo.”
Here's a report from Ernst and Young—the court-appointed monitor—describing the settlement’s virtues. If you have x-ray vision, you can review the settlement terms at par. 26; if not, you’ll just see redacted text. As reported, Crystallex will receive something close to the face value of its judgment, but paid over time. As Bloomberg notes (tongue firmly in cheek, I suspect): “The payment delays put in question how Crystallex will get paid.” The benefit to the government is equally questionable. For now, the settlement defers the hearing on Crystallex’s alter ego claims, which has been continued until Dec. 21. But it’s not like the government and PDVSA get long-term peace. Even if the settlement moots Crystallex’s alter ego claims, any creditor can replicate its litigation strategy. So the government gets only a temporary hiatus, and why should that justify such a generous settlement (at least in nominal value)?
Anyway, the Latin American Herald Tribune (owned and published by Russ Dallen, who also runs investment bank Caracas Capital) asked the federal judge in Delaware to unseal documents related to the settlement, and the judge agreed. Well, sort of. A little bit. In principle. The parties had jointly filed a sealed letter describing the settlement. The judge has instructed them to re-file by the end of the day today, making only redactions “consistent with the governing law and the Court's rules.” But I would be surprised if the new filing dispels confusion about the settlement. The public has a general right of access to judicial proceedings (whether framed as a common law right or as a first amendment right), but parties are nevertheless allowed to file documents under seal when there is a compelling reason to do so. As an initial matter, I would expect the document filed today to contain significant redactions, leaving much about the settlement unclear. And while the judge can order further disclosure, there’s no guarantee that this will happen.
I will update this post once a copy of the letter appears on the court's docket, and we’ll see if the mystery clears up. For now, however, I’m skeptical that whatever document gets filed today will provide much clarity.
Dal Circolo Gulati :
About That Mysterious Crystallex Settlement
posted by Mark Weidemaier
We have covered Crystallex’s lawsuit against Venezuela a bunch here on Credit Slips (for example, here, here, here, here, and here). In late November, the parties reached a settlement, shortly before a December 5 hearing on Crystallex’s alter ego claims and PDVSA’s cross motion to dismiss. A ruling in Crystallex’s favor would have let it look to PDVSA’s assets to satisfy its judgment against the government. As noted in the Financial Times, a pro-Crystallex ruling might also have had broader implications, potentially letting “holders of defaulted Venezuelan sovereign bonds also to seek to seize PDVSA assets, potentially including those of Citgo.”
Here's a report from Ernst and Young—the court-appointed monitor—describing the settlement’s virtues. If you have x-ray vision, you can review the settlement terms at par. 26; if not, you’ll just see redacted text. As reported, Crystallex will receive something close to the face value of its judgment, but paid over time. As Bloomberg notes (tongue firmly in cheek, I suspect): “The payment delays put in question how Crystallex will get paid.” The benefit to the government is equally questionable. For now, the settlement defers the hearing on Crystallex’s alter ego claims, which has been continued until Dec. 21. But it’s not like the government and PDVSA get long-term peace. Even if the settlement moots Crystallex’s alter ego claims, any creditor can replicate its litigation strategy. So the government gets only a temporary hiatus, and why should that justify such a generous settlement (at least in nominal value)?
Anyway, the Latin American Herald Tribune (owned and published by Russ Dallen, who also runs investment bank Caracas Capital) asked the federal judge in Delaware to unseal documents related to the settlement, and the judge agreed. Well, sort of. A little bit. In principle. The parties had jointly filed a sealed letter describing the settlement. The judge has instructed them to re-file by the end of the day today, making only redactions “consistent with the governing law and the Court's rules.” But I would be surprised if the new filing dispels confusion about the settlement. The public has a general right of access to judicial proceedings (whether framed as a common law right or as a first amendment right), but parties are nevertheless allowed to file documents under seal when there is a compelling reason to do so. As an initial matter, I would expect the document filed today to contain significant redactions, leaving much about the settlement unclear. And while the judge can order further disclosure, there’s no guarantee that this will happen.
I will update this post once a copy of the letter appears on the court's docket, and we’ll see if the mystery clears up. For now, however, I’m skeptical that whatever document gets filed today will provide much clarity.
Abulico
Forumer storico
Abulico
Forumer storico
Jorge Rodríguez: Están avanzados los seis puntos de la agenda de acuerdos
estratto...El ministro afirmó que la intención de esta jornada de diálogo es que ninguna de las partes, tanto el gobierno como la oposición, se levanten de la mesa sin que se concreten acuerdos.
estratto...El ministro afirmó que la intención de esta jornada de diálogo es que ninguna de las partes, tanto el gobierno como la oposición, se levanten de la mesa sin que se concreten acuerdos.