Nov 11, 2009, 10:34am
Nov 10, 2009, 8:45am
Of course, history will be made today. After a long buildup, today is the big day. Can you feel the anticipation? We can. You will have to wait until this evening for your release, though.
Of course, we refer to the release by the DTCC of CDS information at 5pm Eastern time today.
Sep 15, 2009, 2:22pm
I sense some judgment from the Bloomberg reporter here re:...
More »
Sep 15, 2009, 2:00pm
Tudor BVI Global: August 2009: 0.5% YTD: 12.5% ...as for...
More »
Sep 09, 2009, 11:27am
Goldman Sachs partner managing director Richard Kimball Jr. apparently got...
More »
Sep 09, 2009, 10:15am
Ladies, if you've been looking to work under one of...
More »
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 2:13PM
mmmm....cds humor. i see what you did there.
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 2:15PM
Can anyone explain why a centralized transparent exchange for CDS would be so difficult to create when CDS are simply options on bonds?
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 2:15PM
Why at 5pm? Why not at 3:50pm?
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 2:18PM
#2: dealers make lots of money crossing CDS. These profits would dry up with an open exchange therefore it's in their best interest to try to delay as long as possible.
Posted by whatelseisgoingon , Nov 04, 2008 2:19PM
@2, because that would take the marking ability out of the hands of the trading desk, and I would suspect that there may be a few mismarked books out there due to the lack of liquidity. Kind of like the tobacco lobby, everyone knows it isn't right, but they keep people employed
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 2:23PM
4,5: Aren't most of these CDS dealers guys who used to deal in cash bonds and were displaced by Trace? Guess they will just have to invent CDSx2 or something
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 2:26PM
@6: exactly. Trace did away with a bunch of bond guys. DTCC's CDS list will do away with more.
On Wall Street, the less transparency, the more profits (and vice versa).
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 2:44PM
*an historic
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 2:44PM
thanks for saying "a historic" and not "an historic" as is so trendy (and wrong) these days.
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 3:13PM
Epic is the new historic, misused though it be.
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 3:30PM
"an historic..." is correct. Just as correct as a British oil trader saying, "Shell are long."
Posted by EricM , Nov 04, 2008 4:24PM
@8/11,
"An historic" is not correct. "An" is used before words beginning with the letter H only when the H is silent, as in hour. Back to elementary school, both of you.
Posted by guest , Nov 04, 2008 5:13PM
@12,
It actually depends on how you pronounce "a". Your silent 'H' rule is just a rule of thumb. The point is to disrupt the flow of a sentence as little as possible. Back to acting like the bottom of the class state school grad you are.
Posted by Seaman Bodine , Nov 04, 2008 5:38PM
so - data is posted; merrill and morgan are the largest non-sovereign names...
and no GS?
Posted by guest , Nov 05, 2008 6:47PM
@13 - based on the pronunciation of "a"??? it's not a rule of thumb; it's a rule: you use "an" before a vowel sound and "a" before a consonant sound. if you're a brit and you pronounce the following word without the "h" sound ("an 'istoric"), you could argue for the usage. but accents aside, generally "an historic" is wrong.