Andrew Kissner, a partner at Morrison Foerster specializing in sovereign debt and liability management, dives into the murky waters of corporate debt. He sheds light on Liability Management Exercises (LMEs) and their clever loopholes like 'getting J. Screwed.' The conversation navigates through the complexities of sovereign debt restructuring, touching on the impact of court rulings and consent payments. Kissner also discusses how evolving strategies in finance mirror innovations in basketball, revealing the strategic dance between borrowers and lenders.
Liability management exercises (LMEs) allow borrowers to exploit loose covenants, generating tension among creditors through complex 'up-tier' transactions.
The evolving nature of creditor strategies in corporate finance could signal similar aggressive practices emerging in sovereign debt restructurings, raising concerns.
Deep dives
Understanding Liability Management Exercises
Liability management exercises (LMEs) have become a dominant trend in corporate finance, emerging as alternatives to formal bankruptcy proceedings. These exercises allow corporate borrowers to exchange distressed debt trading below par for new debt with better terms, often involving increased collateral or interest rates. This process initially began with simple distressed exchanges but evolved into more complex transactions known as 'up-tier' transactions. In these situations, borrowers offer new loans to specific lenders, allowing them to jump ahead in repayment priority, a dynamic that can create significant tension among different creditor groups.
The Evolution of Creditor Behavior and Contractual Language
The behavior of creditors has shifted towards more aggressive tactics, which has been facilitated by the loosening of covenants in loan agreements. Following the 2008 financial crisis, new players entered the market, driving a competitive environment that encouraged borrowers to negotiate looser terms. As creditors began to notice loopholes, innovative strategies emerged, resulting in practices such as the up-tier transaction becoming commonplace. These developments point to an evolving landscape in corporate finance where creditors increasingly exploit ambiguous contractual language for competitive advantage.
Sovereign Debt Comparisons and Implications
The standardized nature of sovereign debt documents presents unique challenges for creditors and may create similar exploitation opportunities found in corporate finance. Typically shorter and simpler than corporate loan agreements, sovereign debt contracts are often regionally uniform, raising concerns that they may lack necessary protections against creditor manipulation. Recent trends have shown the advent of consent payments in sovereign restructurings, paralleling aggressive practices from the corporate sector, which could easily transfer to sovereign debt contexts. The potential for similar exploitation suggests that as LMEs become normalized in corporate finance, other markets, including sovereign debt, may be prone to similar pressures and practices.
Innovation and Resistance in Debt Structures
Despite the prevalence of new creditor strategies, there remains a degree of hesitance in adapting these aggressive practices to the sovereign debt arena. The fear of stepping into uncharted waters can hinder the adoption of techniques similar to those employed in the corporate landscape. Additionally, the long-standing tradition of perceived fairness in sovereign borrowers makes implementing drastic changes more complicated. However, should a successful precedent emerge, the floodgates may open for sovereign issuers to adopt more contentious strategies similar to those seen in corporate restructuring.
Getting "J. Screwed" Sounds Better than Getting "Argentina'd"
In the world of corporate debt, everyone seems to be talking about "Liability Management Exercises," where a borrower, with a subset of creditors, exploits loose loan covenants in ways that leave other creditors screaming mad. Even better, these LME techniques have clever names: "trap doors," getting "J. Screwed," etc. And while the worlds of sovereign and corporate debt don't overlap all that much, we wonder if litigation over LMEs can tell us anything about sovereign debt restructurings. Alas, we don't know much about corporate debt. Thankfully, Andrew Kissner (Morrison Foerster) joins us to dispel our confusion.
Producer: Leanna Doty
Get the Snipd podcast app
Unlock the knowledge in podcasts with the podcast player of the future.
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode
Save any moment
Hear something you like? Tap your headphones to save it with AI-generated key takeaways
Share & Export
Send highlights to Twitter, WhatsApp or export them to Notion, Readwise & more
AI-powered podcast player
Listen to all your favourite podcasts with AI-powered features
Discover highlights
Listen to the best highlights from the podcasts you love and dive into the full episode