DanteAllemis schreef op 11 januari 2018 15:27:
2) A real flaw in thinking (at least to me) seems to be that they attribute a 25 % value to the Tier1-bonds in the "CVC-case" as there was a buy-back planned. But to my knowledge these buybacks would have been voluntary, not mandatory. But they don't talk about the possibility of bondholders not accepting the buyback. Especially the T1 of the Bank would not have had a reason to accept the buy-back, as their expectation from the bankruptcy-scenario would have been higher. This plays back to above quibble 1) - it is unreasonable to take the lower value of the CVC-scenario here. In any case, the conditions of the planned buyback would have to be looked into closer, I think. For example, if a minimim take-up (of the buyback, for instance 66% of bondholders accepting) would have been a condition for the whole CVC-scenario to play out, this would have to be taken into account. In order not to "reward" hold-outs one could calculate the evenly now to be compensated value then by (66 % x 25% + 33% x 100 %). Just a thought.