Reservas BCRA Último Consolidado 30.230 MM (08-01-14)
Dif c/ consolidado previo: - 207 MM
Variación últimos 3 consolidados: -299 MM
Durísimo!!!
Títulos Públicos
Re: Títulos Públicos
¿Que puede pasar con nuestros bonos si a corte falla en contra de la Argentina?
Re: Títulos Públicos
Argentina Gets U.S. Supreme Court Hearing in Bank Case
The U.S. Supreme Court will take up part of a multibillion-dollar fight over defaulted Argentine bonds, agreeing to review a court order requiring two banks to turn over information about the country’s assets.
Argentina’s appeal in the case is separate from a higher-profile lawsuit that the country says threatens to force a new default. In the case accepted today, Argentina is seeking to block a court order enforcing subpoenas against Bank of America Corp. and state-owned Banco de la Nacion Argentina.
NML Capital Ltd., an affiliate of billionaire Paul Singer’s Elliott Management Corp., wants the information as it tries to collect $1.6 billion in judgments it won in U.S. court cases. Billionaire Kenneth Dart’s EM Ltd. is pressing similar claims, though it isn’t involved in the Supreme Court case.
Argentina says the order, issued by a federal trial judge in Manhattan, improperly demands information about assets held by the banks in non-U.S. accounts.
The country says the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act would bar the bondholders from collecting those overseas assets. As a result, the country argues, the law also precludes the bondholders from demanding information about that money.
The court order “targets property outside the United States that could not under any circumstances be the subject of execution under the FSIA,” Argentina argued.
Court Precedent
Argentina points to a 2010 Supreme Court ruling that said federal laws generally don’t apply overseas.
NML contends that the FSIA doesn’t affect the traditional power of federal trial judges to order entities to provide information that is relevant to a legal claim.
“A well-functioning market for sovereign debt depends on investors’ confidence that they will be able to enforce loan agreements with foreign countries -- and to collect on any judgment obtained,” NML argued.
The New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of NML.
The Supreme Court acted after U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli joined Argentina in urging the justices to hear the case. Verrilli said in court papers that the subpoenas “are improper insofar as they are directed to assets located outside the United States.”
In a separate case, Argentina is fighting a court order that bars the country from making payments on restructured debt unless it pays holders of the defaulted bonds. Argentina has until February to file a Supreme Court appeal in that case.
The case accepted today is 12-842.
To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Patrick Oster at poster@bloomberg.net
Facebook
The U.S. Supreme Court will take up part of a multibillion-dollar fight over defaulted Argentine bonds, agreeing to review a court order requiring two banks to turn over information about the country’s assets.
Argentina’s appeal in the case is separate from a higher-profile lawsuit that the country says threatens to force a new default. In the case accepted today, Argentina is seeking to block a court order enforcing subpoenas against Bank of America Corp. and state-owned Banco de la Nacion Argentina.
NML Capital Ltd., an affiliate of billionaire Paul Singer’s Elliott Management Corp., wants the information as it tries to collect $1.6 billion in judgments it won in U.S. court cases. Billionaire Kenneth Dart’s EM Ltd. is pressing similar claims, though it isn’t involved in the Supreme Court case.
Argentina says the order, issued by a federal trial judge in Manhattan, improperly demands information about assets held by the banks in non-U.S. accounts.
The country says the U.S. Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act would bar the bondholders from collecting those overseas assets. As a result, the country argues, the law also precludes the bondholders from demanding information about that money.
The court order “targets property outside the United States that could not under any circumstances be the subject of execution under the FSIA,” Argentina argued.
Court Precedent
Argentina points to a 2010 Supreme Court ruling that said federal laws generally don’t apply overseas.
NML contends that the FSIA doesn’t affect the traditional power of federal trial judges to order entities to provide information that is relevant to a legal claim.
“A well-functioning market for sovereign debt depends on investors’ confidence that they will be able to enforce loan agreements with foreign countries -- and to collect on any judgment obtained,” NML argued.
The New York-based 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of NML.
The Supreme Court acted after U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli joined Argentina in urging the justices to hear the case. Verrilli said in court papers that the subpoenas “are improper insofar as they are directed to assets located outside the United States.”
In a separate case, Argentina is fighting a court order that bars the country from making payments on restructured debt unless it pays holders of the defaulted bonds. Argentina has until February to file a Supreme Court appeal in that case.
The case accepted today is 12-842.
To contact the reporter on this story: Greg Stohr in Washington at gstohr@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Patrick Oster at poster@bloomberg.net
-
Operador Rava
- Mensajes: 198
- Registrado: Vie Oct 12, 2012 10:02 am
Re: Títulos Públicos
CORTE SUPREMA DE EEUU TOMA CASO DE ARGENTINA (Argentina v. NML Capital, Ltd., 12-842)
Re: Títulos Públicos
Actualicé planilla de CCL con los datos del Bonar 2018 (AN18)
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... _api#gid=2
Si ven falla me dicen que trato de corregir
PD: la planilla original no es de mi autoría es de alguien bajo nick Dagger
..
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... _api#gid=2
Si ven falla me dicen que trato de corregir
PD: la planilla original no es de mi autoría es de alguien bajo nick Dagger
..
-
hstibanelli
- Mensajes: 4834
- Registrado: Mié Sep 30, 2009 12:03 pm
Re: Títulos Públicos
que caro el ro15
en 1000 vendo todo
en 1000 vendo todo
-
hernan1974
- Mensajes: 14408
- Registrado: Mar Mar 03, 2009 2:48 pm
Re: Títulos Públicos
gracias chare 
Re: Títulos Públicos
Ahi averigue no es el caso principal de pari passu ,,,
Re: Títulos Públicos
Febo escribió:Me dicen que la Corte de USS tomó el caso de Argentina.
Pero el caso principal o un accesorio?
Re: Títulos Públicos
Bah, era el caso del Banco Nación.
Re: Títulos Públicos
Febo escribió:Me dicen que la Corte de USS tomó el caso de Argentina.
Daniel Cancel @DanCancel 5m
U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear Argentina's bank subpoena case via @GregStohr. Still isn't pari passu case, but let the speculation begin.
Re: Títulos Públicos
Me dicen que la Corte de USS tomó el caso de Argentina.
Re: Títulos Públicos
luisgarciaar escribió:Che alguno que haga AT? AA17 figura de taza, falta el asa y
dongps escribió:Yo veo que el 7 de enero la media de 21 paso por arriba de la media de 42 ruedas, señal compradora de un activo en tendencia alcista (MA200)
luisgarciaar escribió: Venía en clara tendencia alcista, intervino ANSES y caé hasta que se comienza a formar la figura de continuación de la tendencia alcista que comento, una tasa con aza, febo agarrame la p.jaza
Para confirmar la figura deberìa hacer un pequeño retroceso las próximas ruedas, luego una pequeña suba y salir con fuerza.
Veremos.
http://www.investopedia.com/university/ ... harts3.asp
Conviene hacer AT en un mercado intervenido como el nuestro? No digo solamente por los días en que es obvia intervención del ANSeS, sino porque habrá otros días en que no es tan obvia y vos los tomarías como "limpios" para tu AT.
Re: Títulos Públicos
Me muero c ANSES marcando el AN18 c USD, pq el único que puede estar vendiendo c USD es ANSES. 
Re: Títulos Públicos
chare escribió:Termino demandadisima la divisa 0.041
hernan1974 escribió: que haces chare? tenes idea cuanto vendio el BCRA?
chare escribió: Hola Hernyy. bien Creo que vendio unos 20 o 30 pq el resto fue todo de Nación y Prov
Total liquidado 130/140. así que entre Nación y Prov casi 100M