|
||
2008-07-04 — boombustblog.com
"Paramax claims that, from the beginning, the UBS hedge was cosmetic. In May 2007, when the original agreement was signed, the terms were a fraction of the market rate. Why agree to such thin terms? You put yourself at risk, no? Also, Paramax had only $200m under management and its agreements with its own investors limited it to commit no more than $40m to any single deal. Thus, it could never compensate UBS fully for any meaningful loss in value of the $1.3bn UBS was trying to insure, it claims. So, Paramax must be in the monoline insurance biz Sealed. I know, that was a low blow..."
source article | permalink | discuss | subscribe by: | RSS | email Comments: Be the first to add a comment add a comment | go to forum thread Note: Comments may take a few minutes to show up on this page. If you go to the forum thread, however, you can see them immediately. |