while I honestly do appreciate Testpilot's experience and subsequent view, may I similarly put forward the following for consideration....The issue of assignment is secondary to the obligation, and that obligation states that for hedge validity, solvency is required...Lehmann Bros does not exist anymore, and as such, the hedge, which was created under the premise that Lehmann's was required to remain solvent for the obligation to be upheld, is dead...The hedge died last year when Lehmann's died...To now assign a dead hedge and "resurrect" it into eternal life, basically means that we need a "if the proverbial hits the fan, don't worry about that solvency issue" clause written into the original hedge contract...I don't think such a "get out of jail free" clause would have been present....
Similarly, if it was so plainly obvious that Norton were to be ultimately held accountable for a breach in hedge obligation on the part of Lehmann Bros, I honestly don't think that Parker et al would've spent so much time and money to date trying to prevent the inevitable.
Like I said, Gents, just my view...but I do appreciate the open opportunity that this forum provides for the consideration of different opinions....
Clozapine
NGF Price at posting:
24.0¢ Sentiment: LT Buy Disclosure: Held
