When first mooted, TSE market structure had changes had possibilities, but
a) potential changes were watered down
b) cos who cdn't clear low hurdles were given 3yrs to clear them with a "plan"
c) changes offer minimal structural improvement to attract more foreign participation.
Result: The move from 6 'venues'* with different listing rules* to 3 venues** (w/ diff listing rules) will basically mean nothing to the vast majority of investors.
*TSE1, TSE2, TSE Mothers, Tokyo Pro, JASDAQ Standard, JASDAQ Growth
**TSE Prime, TSE Standard, TSE Growth
And it will have taken 3 years and efforts at every major company to simply relabel the venue on which they are listed, and in the end, it looks like a few percent of listed Japan will be slowly phased out of the TOPIX Index.
Some odd comments here, but otherwise a worthwhile summation of current onshore suits (which, since August, have been amalgamated at the Guangzhou Intermediate Court) against Evergrande.
The "new info" here is in the breakdown and nature of creditors.
The story suggests US$13.2bn of suits so far. Some of that will be people owed money. Some is people suing in order to start the process of control of projects. Some are suits just to lay claim because it looks like it will get worse.
There is some surprising stuff.
We continue to have comments about onshore vs offshore. It STILL doesn't work like that.
Offshore bonds issued by Evergrande ($3333.HK) and its subsidiaries guaranteed by EG are different than the bonds issued by the onshore real estate subsidiary of 3333 called Evergrande Real
one would not need to sell in the market), and anyone shorting it hard post-tender should have their head examined (they should have shorted into the tender).
The data kinda looks like the account of Nomura Aya (daughter of activist Murakami-san) tendered some shares, but we won't know until Friday, or the next time his company City Index Elevens files.
Why?
Tender quantity was an odd-lot ending in x99 shares. And Nomura Aya held 2+%