Posts tagged 'hybrid bonds'

Moody’s to operate on bank debt uplifts

| Feb 14 2011 16:22 | Comment |

Proponents of CoCos, bridge banks and bail-ins rejoice!

Moody’s announced Monday that it was analysing the impact of new resolution tools on its rating of subordinated bank debt. As surely you must know, since the financial crisis governments have shifted slowly away from full creditor protection and towards a bit of burdensharing. Read more

Anglo Irish’s burden-sharing template

Tracy Alloway used to be deputy editor of FT Alphaville. Here she learned the details of derivatives, the absurdities of accounting and the various structures of ... erm ... structured finance. She now covers big US banks for the FT paper, including Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley. She pops up on FT Alphaville every once in a while.

Learn more

| Subscribe to Tracy's posts
| Oct 22 2010 12:49 | Comment |

On Thursday, Anglo Irish — Ireland’s euro-guzzling bailed-out bank — unveiled a dramatic exchange offer for investors in its subordinated, or junior, debt.

The bank is offering holders of some of its outstanding sub-debt to swap their notes for new Irish government guaranteed bonds that will be due in 2011 with a coupon of three-month Euribor plus 3.75 per cent. Holders of the €1.57bn worth of three Lower Tier 2 (LT2) bonds will receive just 20 cents on the euro. Investors in about €377m of perpetual junior debt will get even less — 5 cents on the euro. Read more

Basel gives good CoCo

Joseph joined FT Alphaville way back in March 2010. He likes all the politically and legally fiddly bits of finance. He also likes credit, rates, global macro, tail risk, and all that stuff. (You should email him story ideas. He’ll take anything.)

Learn more

| Subscribe to Joseph's posts
| Aug 19 2010 18:42 | Comment |

Basel goes bank CoCo nuts. Or as the Basel Committee has put it more, ah, soberly:

The Basel Committee is of the view that all regulatory capital instruments must be capable of absorbing a loss at least in gone-concern situations. Furthermore, it believes that a public sector injection of capital needed to avoid the failure of a bank should not protect investors in regulatory capital instruments from absorbing the loss that they would have incurred had the public sector not chosen to rescue the bank. Read more