Bondholders seize Argentine Tall Ship

wendell borton

Those lowlife bondholder bastards are up to no good again. The argentine ship Libertat has been held to "ransom" by USA bondholders in ghana. The bondholders have also tried to bribe the ghanains with promises of investment:

Robert Raben, director of the American Task Force Argentina, a Washington lobbying group representing bondholders, said the people of Ghana will benefit from Thursday's ruling.
"As a country upholds the rule of law, investment increases and the economy grows. This is precisely the opposite direction that Argentina has gone – repudiating debt that it has the ability to pay," Raben's statement said. "As a result of these policies, investment into Argentina has evaporated, and it has become isolated from the international community."

.


Argentina has responded that it won't bend.

"Argentina will exhaust all judicial possibilities in Ghana and in international courts in defense of its sovereignty, against the vulture funds and those who try to impose a global system in which people's lives are subjected to the speculation of capital," the foreign ministry said.

Good to see that argentina is not going to give in to the bully tactics of the capitalist vultures, unlike some other goverments.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20121012/af-ghana-seized-argentine-ship/

Madam Marie

Feck the ships, want do they want with Daniel Craig?

Sulla Felix

Is this not similar to how the Sherriff can confiscate goods in payment for a debt?

juan.kerr

Argentine reneged on their debts, they obviously aren't playing ball at settling so the bondholders used legal means to attempt to get paid what they are due.

Dont see the problem. Did the state of Argentina not borrow the money in question?

wendell borton

Argentina offered 30c on the doller for bonds, to which must bondholders accepted.

juan.kerr

wendell borton wrote: »

Argentina offered 30c on the doller for bonds, to which must bondholders accepted.

Yes, I am aware of the background. As you said, 'most' bondholders accepted. The ones in question didn't, so are legitimately entitled to pursue the outstanding debt.

Again, not seeing a problem.

msg11

wendell borton wrote: »

Argentina offered 30c on the doller for bonds, to which must bondholders accepted.

Should have told em to f uck off .. But insulting them is also good!

wendell borton

If you gamble and lose you get nothing this is no diferent. They should be grateful for the 30c the goverment are willing to give them.

juan.kerr

wendell borton wrote: »

If you gamble and lose you get nothing this is no diferent. They should be grateful for the 30c the goverment are willing to give them.

Who gambled? Is lending to a sovereign government considered gambling?

seanmacc

juan.kerr wrote: »

Who gambled? Is lending to a sovereign government considered gambling?

If its uninsured, yes it is.

If you bought banking shares in 2008 they were seen as a very safe investment but look what happened there.

washman3

juan.kerr wrote: »

Who gambled? Is lending to a sovereign government considered gambling?

Lending is always a gamble. and so it should be.
There is always a risk that one will not retrieve what one has lent, be that a lawnmower to your neighbour or a a billion dollars to a nation.;)

juan.kerr

Sure, but it the lender didn't reach a settlement the debt remains outstanding regardless of whether it is a gamble or not.

Are we saying that Argentina can't afford to repay?

GalwayGuy2

"Argentina will exhaust all judicial possibilities in Ghana and in international courts in defense of its sovereignty

If they want to be a sovereign nation then they have to repay debts that they willingly took out.

washman3

washman3 wrote: »

Lending is always a gamble. and so it should be.
There is always a risk that one will not retrieve what one has lent, be that a lawnmower to your neighbour or a a billion dollars to a nation.;)

Buying government debt is not seen as a gamble and so it shouldn't, any country like Argentina who default on moneys owed should suffer.

The investors buying government debt are usually mutual funds who range from the average joe to pension funds, these funds do not buy risky debt.

Irelands case is different, we socialised bank debts and are now paying these off which is leading to people having some coloured view of government debt as debt which should not be paid.

If a country borrows to fund its deficit and it renegades then it should suffer. The only reason Argentina isn't absolutely destroyed is because Hugo Chavez is the only one buying their debt after they defaulted on it.

ArmaniJeanss

wendell borton wrote: »

If you gamble and lose you get nothing this is no diferent. They should be grateful for the 30c the goverment are willing to give them.

Curious world you live in where a reneging borrower is the good guy if he agrees to repay a percentage of whats owed, whereas the lender is a bully, vulture and lowlife bastard for attempting to get back what is owed them.

Remind me never to lend you anything.

juan.kerr

I wonder what the OP thinks of the Quinn family carry on.

Scioch

Is it bond original bondholders or vulture funds at the centre of this ?

juan.kerr

Scioch wrote: »

Is it bond original bondholders or vulture funds at the centre of this ?

They are the original bondholders I believe.

wendell borton

juan.kerr wrote: »

I wonder what the OP thinks of the Quinn family carry on.

Quinn is utterly in the wrong he must have been seriously blinded by greed to get in to bed with anglo. But at the same time quinn was a major employer in area forgotten by the goverment.
He should be given at least chance of coming up with a structured way of paying off the money and anyway if the gov. had not nationalised the debt this thing could have been avoided. The way the whole thing has been dealt with in a spiteful manner (by both sides).

3rdDegree

msg11 wrote: »

wendell borton wrote: »

Argentina offered 30c on the doller for bonds, to which must bondholders accepted.

Should have told em to f uck off .. But insulting them is also good!

They did. It didn't work.

sock puppet

wendell borton wrote: »

and anyway if the gov. had not nationalised the debt this thing could have been avoided.

And what about all the Quinn policy holders?

wendell borton

sock puppet wrote: »

And what about all the Quinn policy holders?

Quinn insurance has been given away to liberty for a steal while every insurance holder now has to pay for this.
Surly a better sale deal could have been made or else a employee buy out with the taking on of a partner in the business, like what has been done with the health insurance side of the business.

token101

Luis Suarez, a cadet working in the ship's galley

****ing double jobbers.

General General

wendell borton wrote: »

Quinn is utterly in the wrong he must have been seriously blinded by greed to get in to bed with anglo. But at the same time quinn was a major employer in area forgotten by the goverment.
He should be given at least chance of coming up with a structured way of paying off the money and anyway if the gov. had not nationalised the debt this thing could have been avoided. The way the whole thing has been dealt with in a spiteful manner (by both sides).

How much does Quinn owe again? How would it have been less if the government hadn't 'nationalised the debt'?

Pottler

"Libertat, Libertat, Libertat".
Sounds like a scene from "Scarface". Does the fat politician get knifed soon?

ted1

This news is 2 weeks old.