Author Topic: Is there a light at the end of the tunnel? (Read 5090 times)

Boroda · « **Reply #45 on:** June 09, 2004, 01:06:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Actually, I was referring to stuff like this:

Toad, if someone invested into "state obligations" that offered profit of 40-50% a year - they could understand that they can loose their money.

I agree that 1998 crisis was horrible. Mostly for Russians, not for foreigners. Frankly speaking - I don't understand why people who arranged that "panama" are still free and not in jail forever.

But I insist that Russia pays all it's debts and pays them in time.

mosgood · « **Reply #46 on:** June 09, 2004, 01:13:23 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Boroda
Toad, if someone invested into "state obligations" that offered profit of 40-50% a year - they could understand that they can loose their money.

I agree that 1998 crisis was horrible. Mostly for Russians, not for foreigners. Frankly speaking - I don't understand why people who arranged that "panama" are still free and not in jail forever.

But I insist that Russia pays all it's debts and pays them in time.

Uhh... don't you mean "On time...?" cause in time means... whenever....

Boroda · « **Reply #47 on:** June 09, 2004, 01:23:58 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mosgood
Uhh... don't you mean "On time...?" cause in time means... whenever....

I meant "as scheduled". Sorry

Sometimes I use direct translations from Russian expressions

TheDudeDVant · « **Reply #48 on:** June 09, 2004, 01:25:14 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by mosgood
Uhh... don't you mean "On time...?" cause in time means... whenever....

If you pay an obligation 'On time', didnt you pay it 'In time'?? geeesss

mosgood · « **Reply #49 on:** June 09, 2004, 01:31:42 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TheDudeDVant
If you pay an obligation 'On time', didnt you pay it 'In time'?? geeesss

that's right. "In time" also can mean.. whenever....

you know this..... gees

Toad · « **Reply #50 on:** June 09, 2004, 01:32:07 PM »

Wrong again, Boroda, no matter how much you might "insist".

That clip was from here:

Sovereign Defaults: Moving Higher Again in 2003?

That is "Sovereign" as in

Quote

Defaults by sovereign governments are rising again--...

....Russia's default on US$39 billion of Russian ruble debt stands out because of its size: it was the largest local currency default by a sovereign[/u][/color] since Brazil's default on about the equivalent of US$62 billion in 1990

So, you see, the SOVEREIGN GOVERNMENT of RUSSIA defaulted.

Boroda · « **Reply #51 on:** June 09, 2004, 01:56:35 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
So, you see, the SOVEREIGN GOVERNMENT of RUSSIA defaulted.

Toad, this details are beyond my knowledge of English.

I said that the "default" didn't mean our refusal to pay for the international debts. We pay for the credits we have taken. Our beloved government (may it rot in hell) dropped the $/ruble exchange rate so it could pay for the "state treasury obligations" that were priced in rubles, so 90% of Russian citizens have lost all their savings.

Again: if someone expects to get 50% profit yearly - he should be prepared to lose his money. It's a "risky investment". And it was ME and MY PEOPLE who paid for this games.

Toad · « **Reply #52 on:** June 09, 2004, 02:05:58 PM »

It's real simple. The Sovereign Government fo the Russian Federation failed to pay what it owed.

Can't put it any simpler than that.

Quote

Sidebar: Defining Sovereign Defaults Standard & Poor's generally defines default as the failure to meet a principal or interest payment on the due date (or within the specified grace period) contained in the original terms of the debt issue.

Questions can arise, however, when applying this definition to different types of sovereign obligations. In the sovereign default survey, each issuer's debt is considered in default in any of the following circumstances:

For local and foreign currency bonds, notes, and bills, when either scheduled debt service is not paid on the due date, or an exchange offer of new debt contains terms less favorable than the original issue;

For central bank currency, when notes are converted into new currency of less than equivalent face value; and

For bank loans, when either scheduled debt service is not paid on the due date, or a rescheduling of principal and/or interest is agreed to by creditors at less favorable terms than the original loan. Such rescheduling agreements covering short- and long-term bank debt are considered defaults even where, for legal or regulatory reasons, creditors deem forced rollover of principal to be voluntary.

In addition, many rescheduled sovereign bank loans are ultimately extinguished at a discount from their original face value. Typical deals have included exchange offers (such as those linked to the issuance of Brady bonds), debt/equity swaps related to government privatization programs, and/or buybacks for cash.

Standard & Poor's considers such transactions as defaults because they contain terms less favorable than the original obligation.

Each sovereign in default at any point during the year is included (along with the U.S. dollar equivalent of its debt then in default) in the annual issuer totals.

For example, in June 2002, Moldova failed to repay an outstanding foreign currency bond at maturity. Subsequently, in August, investors exchanged the defaulted bond for a new seven-year bond. As a result, Moldova is counted in the 2002 issuer default totals, but--assuming the government maintains normal debt service going forward--it will not be counted among sovereign issuers in default in 2003.

Curval · « **Reply #53 on:** June 09, 2004, 02:11:09 PM »

Lies and propaganda Toad. Lies and propaganda.

Instead of the stock market we should go to a planned economy. That would be fair and would work well.

ravells · « **Reply #54 on:** June 09, 2004, 02:12:50 PM »

I now think the tunnel is a cyclotron and we'll never get out of it.

Ravs

Toad · « **Reply #55 on:** June 09, 2004, 02:19:29 PM »

At least it's not a food processor!

TheDudeDVant · « **Reply #56 on:** June 09, 2004, 02:21:47 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Hawklore
There sure are lights along the tunnel..

How ironic to pick a picture of an endless tunnel.. Was kinda my original thought of the situation.. lol

ravells · « **Reply #57 on:** June 09, 2004, 02:48:06 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
At least it's not a food processor!

That was Stalingrad.

Ravs

Rude · « **Reply #58 on:** June 09, 2004, 04:30:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by capt. apathy
would you have a link for that? any info on what the competing bids where from other (losing) companies?

as to how fairly they competed? our VP was their CEO up until 2000 (funny how whitehouse.gov missed this info in his bio), and is still a major share-holder.

If you can prove foul play, then do it....your black chopper approach to anything the Bush Admin does is silly.

Pongo · « **Reply #59 on:** June 09, 2004, 05:45:56 PM »

That might be a reasonable response if we were not talking about one of the most obvios conflicts of interest in history.
No black helicopter ride is neccesary to see that a man that is the CEO of a company one year and then becomes the prime proponent the next year of a war whose only value is to inflate the profits of said company is in a confict of interest.
I mean really. Conspiracy theorists wont even touch this one. Its so far into fact from theory thats its booring to them.