This is fascinating, in so far as the surface details materialize. However I feel as details of the loan are read in detail in can be reasonably argued that on

This is fascinating, in so far as the surface details materialize. However I feel as details of the loan are read in detail in can be reasonably argued that one side is in fact more right than the other, but the devil's in the details. Early loan payment is a feature of credit. The cashflow is a feature of a fixed income. If the cashflow can be cut short and money returned at the debtors option, the creditor is once again found in a situation of having to seek a superior investment opportunity and thats a risk in some portfolio managers' eyes. I think the argument that the spot economic signals are stacked against revlon isn't a factor in citis favor, and a hedge fund is exercising fiduciary responsibility by closing the debt, ESPECIALLY if the debt has an early payment clause. If citi is told to go "pound sand" then they've effectively acquired a bond position on Revlon tho, so the argument that the hedgefund must return the money sounds valud from the sense that currently, revlon doesn't have a formal bond agreement with citi. I'm very curious as to the court's position in this case, bc if citi has to bite the bullet, IB world is going to laugh at citi