Misfits
Regular
We shall see then Sammael, everything you mentioned is contrary to my beliefs and DD, which is fine. Obviously, I am much more optimistic than your good self.
AVZ Discussion 2022
- Thread starter GazDix
- Start date
We shall see then Sammael, everything you mentioned is contrary to my beliefs and DD, which is fine. Obviously, I am much more optimistic than your good self.
Winenut
GO AVZ!!!!
Have to be to be an Eagles supporter at the moment!
Mate are you expecting the Zijin issues to be put to bed prior to end of suspension ? You lads over in the West (cashcity and co) are all very confident . A bit of nudge nudge wink wink going on over there in Perth perhaps ?
Retrobyte
Hates a beer
Arbitration will go ahead now unless Zijin discontinues their application. They have submitted their claim, AVZ have responded with their own submission as per the process and the statement in the announcement. At arbitration Zijin will get a chance to speak to their submission, as will AVZ, and then the tribunal decides. They may hand down a decision immediately or they may reserve the decision and publish it later. Will depend how complex the arguments are legally.
cruiser51
Top 20
Zijin owns 39.6% of Kamoa
I stand corrected...looks like they are on the list for a tax bill.
Whats interesting here is the terminology that is used in the article 41, "Without legal merit". This is the terminology that AVZ has used when it refers to the situation. I think you are on to something, about being knocked out before it starts. I reckon they also use the term "Spurious"
The case still has not been listed on the ICC website.
Arbitration - ICC - International Chamber of Commerce
With 12 case management teams across the globe, we stand ready to assist you at any stage of your dispute.
iccwbo.org
JAG
Top 20
That's because we WILL NOT BE ATTENDING..The case still has not been listed on the ICC website.
Arbitration - ICC - International Chamber of Commerce
With 12 case management teams across the globe, we stand ready to assist you at any stage of your dispute.iccwbo.org
My left nut is on this......
So the government know they are dodgy pricks . Unfortunately these meat heads cannot resist the offer of snacks .
Bin59
Regular
Brokers Get Unfair Profits From Lending Stock, Pension Funds Say
Bill AlpertJuly 7, 2022 2:00 am ET
A federal magistrate recently recommended class-action status for an antitrust suit concerning share loans.
SPENCER PLATT/GETTY IMAGES
Five of Wall Street’s biggest brokers are a step closer to defending class-action claims that they conspired to wring unfair profits from the nearly $2 trillion dollar market for stock loans.
A successful class-action case could crimp profits at the prime brokerage units of defendants Goldman Sachs (ticker: GS), Morgan Stanley (MS), UBS (UBS), the J.P. Morgan unit of JPMorgan Chase (JPM), and the Merrill Lynch unit of Bank of America (BAC).
On June 30, Manhattan federal magistrate judge Sarah Cave recommended class-action status for an antitrust case in which a trio of pension funds allege the big brokers run a cartel that extracts unfair profits from stock lending. Stock loans are a key part of the short sales and options trades carried out by hedge funds, as well as a profit source for pension and mutual funds.
When a hedge fund wants to short the shares of a particular company, it first borrows those shares from long-term investors such as investment firms, pension and endowment funds and insurance companies. The prime brokers sit between borrower and lender and have exclusive knowledge of both share inventories and trading strategies. The suit alleges that they abuse this position.
For investment giants like BlackRock or Fidelity that manage America’s pensions and savings, lending shares has become an important source of revenue and one of the reasons they have been able to reduce fees on mutual funds. If the suit is successful, these firms could get even more revenue from share lending.
Stocklending is one of the last, large over-the-counter financial markets in theU.S., and its opacity has been called “a market failure” by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. “This asymmetric information between those in the centre of the lending market and those on the periphery may lead to inferiorterms for those on the periphery,” said the SEC in December, when it proposed new reporting requirements on stock loans.
The prime broker defendants abused their central positions to skim profit from bothlenders and borrowers, says the antitrust complaint filed by three pensionfunds in Manhattan’s federal district court in 2017. The defendant brokersconspired to freeze out challengers that had tried to introduce transparentpricing and central clearing to the stock loan business, says the complaint,which cites conversations in which brokerage executives compared themselves tothe five crime families of the New York mafia. When one of the stock-loanstart-ups pitched his product in 2008, the complaint quotes a securitiesclearing executive as responding: “This sounds great, but who’s going to startyour car in the morning?”
If U.S. District Judge Katherine Polk Failla follows last week’s recommendationfor class-action certification, the three funds that brought the suit—the IowaPublic Employees’ Retirement System, the Orange County Employees’ RetirementSystem and the Sonoma County Employees’ Retirement System—could seek damages onbehalf of hundreds of others.
Representingthem are legal teams led by Daniel Brockett, of Quinn Emanuel Urquhart &Sullivan, and Michael Eisenkraft, of Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll. Thelawyers have gotten billions from the big banks in settlements of otherclass-action suits over the banks’ behavior in the markets for credit default swaps, bond markets and mortgage-backed securities.
“We’re pleased with Judge Cave’s ruling on class certification,” said Brockett, “and look forward to continued litigation against the banks to maximize recoveries for the benefit of class members.”
When asked about the allegations in the antitrust suit, Goldman Sachs and UBS declined to comment. Morgan Stanley, J.P. Morgan and Merrill Lynch didn’t respond.
Credit Suisse Group
(CS) was also named in the original complaint, but after exiting the prime brokerage business in the wake of the Archegos CapitalManagement debacle, Credit Suisse settled the stock loan suit for $81 million, without admitting to the allegations.
The brokers deny that their stock loans violate antitrust law, and unsuccessfully sought to have the case dismissed. In a day-long hearing before Judge Cave inApril, lawyers for the prime brokers asserted that stock-lending over -the-counter structure helped pension funds find borrowers forless-sought-after stocks, and helped hedge funds get hard-to-borrow stocks. A more transparent stock loan market would threaten the confidentiality of short sellers positions, said the brokers.
In April’s hearing, the pension fund plaintiffs pointed to several overseas markets that introduced central clearing and public pricing to securities lending. In the U.S., public platforms for trading securities like U.S.Treasuries have trimmed clients’ transaction costs. Economists working with the plaintiffs told Judge Cave that the prime brokers’ grip on stock lending had damaged pension funds by at least $5 billion, and hedge funds by over $2billion.
Althoughthe antitrust plaintiffs seek damages on behalf of the hedge fund industry, notevery fund wanted part in the case. Pretrial discovery was stalled for monthsin 2020, when lawyers representing 22 hedge funds told the court they fearedtheir proprietary trading strategies would be exposed in the stock loan recordsthe plaintiffs were getting from the prime brokers. Anonymizing procedures wereestablished, but even then, seven large quant funds opted out of thecase—including Citadel LLC, Two Sigma Investments, Renaissance Technologies,and D.E. Shaw.
Writeto Bill Alpert at william.alpert@barrons.com
Thunderpony
27 µg per 100 mL
Try weed.
JAG
Top 20
Similar threads
