4 ms·
> I am only curious if someone is playing against CLO now as "The Big Short" guys did Absolutely they are. The heroes of The Big Short weren't doing anything p
by lucozade 8y ago
> I am only curious if someone is playing against CLO now as "The Big Short" guys did
Absolutely they are. The heroes of The Big Short weren't doing anything particularly unusual or special. They were just using credit instruments to bet that they'd be more foreclosures than the market was predicting. There'll be equivalent hedgies doing the same with corporate debt now.
> Isn't this insurance fraud?
No because it's not actually insurance as others have said. They're using similar credit instruments to bet against corporates that the Big Short folk used to bet against mortgages.
Is what they're doing ethical? Probably not though you have to be careful. If you look at the Windstream example linked in the article, I'd argue that the hedgie is using ethically questionable methods to expose, and take advantage of, ethically questionable corporate practice. Not entirely clear who the villain is with that one. Probably both parties.
- datavirtue 8y agoHave to agree. This stems from corporations buying back stock on credit to so that management can get paid. There is a lot going on here. None of it good.
- longerthoughts 8y agoThe article treats the Windstream example like a smoking gun for market manipulation but the cited evidence is a little softer than he's suggesting. All the link really provides is Windstream's claim that Aurelius forced them into bankruptcy, which the judge evidently didn't find to be compelling. Windstream proposed a recovery plan for any default caused by the Uniti spinoff and Aurelius didn't agree to the plan. That doesn't prove that Aurelius shoved Windstream in front of a train, only that they didn't pull them off the tracks.