Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Facebook
Twitter
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Law Firm Directory
Apply to Paul, Weiss
Forums
Law Firm Events
Law Firm Deadlines
TCLA TV
Members
Leaderboards
Premium Database
Premium Chat
Commercial Awareness
Future Trainee Advice
🚨 Reed Smith has just announced its Direct Training Contract route!
The deadline is
20th June
.
👉
Read Becca's announcement post here
📝
Apply directly here
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
Applications Discussion
White & Case - Al Dhafra
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Anon08" data-source="post: 73570"><p>Right, this is complicated, and without any more expository information, this is tricky to understand. Nevertheless, I'll give it a shot.</p><p></p><p>First, let's break down bridge-to-bond facilities. In essence, it is a bridge loan, which is intended to be repaid via the issuance of (typically) high-yield bonds at a later date. A bridge loan is a kind of short-term financing - it is literally what it says, it bridges the gap between where the borrower is and where the borrower wants to be (where the borrower wants to be is only possible with capital that the borrower doesn't have, hence, we have the bridge loan to 'bridge' that 'gap').</p><p></p><p>Second, this 'benchmark'/'template'. The PR blurb doesn't really expand upon what exactly the agreement entails. I am inclined to believe that, considering they reference a 'new green asset-class template', there is some margin ratchet mechanism at play(?) Again, this is conjecture; however, it could be the case that, worked into the bridge loan or the planned bond issuance, there are ESG-linked margin ratchet mechanisms. Considering you've linked to a White & Case article, I'll link one back <a href="https://www.whitecase.com/publications/alert/esg-everywhere-even-leveraged-loans-and-everyones-expert-here-are-three-talking" target="_blank">on this subject</a>, which will do the bulk of the explaining (I would suggest googling to further your understanding of this kind of mechanism). To link back to your question, these mechanisms might drive down the cost of the debt for the borrower.</p><p></p><p>Alternatively, they could just be referring to how they have structured this kind of transaction, with this deal's structure acting as an archetype/benchmark/template for future deals to come. If they have secured a good deal (lower cost of debt for the borrower), considering everyone is super ESG conscious, provided that this new plant is a success, this might set a precedent for future deals concerning solar projects regarding the cost of debt.</p><p></p><p>I don't know whether I've managed to interpret this article correctly - I could be way off, but that's what sprung to my mind!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Anon08, post: 73570"] Right, this is complicated, and without any more expository information, this is tricky to understand. Nevertheless, I'll give it a shot. First, let's break down bridge-to-bond facilities. In essence, it is a bridge loan, which is intended to be repaid via the issuance of (typically) high-yield bonds at a later date. A bridge loan is a kind of short-term financing - it is literally what it says, it bridges the gap between where the borrower is and where the borrower wants to be (where the borrower wants to be is only possible with capital that the borrower doesn't have, hence, we have the bridge loan to 'bridge' that 'gap'). Second, this 'benchmark'/'template'. The PR blurb doesn't really expand upon what exactly the agreement entails. I am inclined to believe that, considering they reference a 'new green asset-class template', there is some margin ratchet mechanism at play(?) Again, this is conjecture; however, it could be the case that, worked into the bridge loan or the planned bond issuance, there are ESG-linked margin ratchet mechanisms. Considering you've linked to a White & Case article, I'll link one back [URL='https://www.whitecase.com/publications/alert/esg-everywhere-even-leveraged-loans-and-everyones-expert-here-are-three-talking']on this subject[/URL], which will do the bulk of the explaining (I would suggest googling to further your understanding of this kind of mechanism). To link back to your question, these mechanisms might drive down the cost of the debt for the borrower. Alternatively, they could just be referring to how they have structured this kind of transaction, with this deal's structure acting as an archetype/benchmark/template for future deals to come. If they have secured a good deal (lower cost of debt for the borrower), considering everyone is super ESG conscious, provided that this new plant is a success, this might set a precedent for future deals concerning solar projects regarding the cost of debt. I don't know whether I've managed to interpret this article correctly - I could be way off, but that's what sprung to my mind! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Our company is called, "The Corporate ___ Academy". What is the missing word here?
Post reply
Forums
Aspiring Lawyers - Applications & General Advice
Applications Discussion
White & Case - Al Dhafra
Top
Bottom
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…