RE: Loan FpML WG Meeting: 9 March 2010, 1000-1100EST (London Time: 3-4pm)

Further feedback from participants:

1. For “LcIssuanceNotice”, the FpML schema does not have a “shareAmount” element available in “letterOfCredit” section to report LC lender shares.
- Now included in the latest schema.

2. Misys is utilizing “OneOffFeeNotice” to create notices for upfront fees to primary and upfront fees to 3rd party. In the “OneOffFeeNotice”, the “facilitySummary” section is required by FpML and expected by DTCC. However, in Loan IQ, upfront fee to primary and upfront fee to 3rd party are deal level event fees which will not have facility level information. Can facilitySummary be an optional element in the OneOffFeeNotice?
- We currently model one-off fees at the Facility Level only and therefore DO require for there to be a reference to the facility. Should we introduce the concept of deal-level fees…?

3. This question is regarding “PricingChangeNotice”. In Loan IQ, an SBLC can have 2 different LC fees: fee on lender shares and fee on issuing bank shares. For outbound notice generation, both fees will be mapped to the same fee type - “LetterOfCreditFee”. The issue comes in inbound side. When a user accepts the inbound pricing change notice, Loan IQ will not be able to identify which LC fee to create since the FpML only supports the single Fee type “LetterofCreditFee”.
- Introduce a new type of fee which can be one-off or accrual based: LCIssuanceFee…?

4. In Fpml, the schema for interest rate, margin, mandatoryCostRate and allInRate are just “decimal”. No place specifically says it needs to be a positive decimal value. However, in DTCC document, it clearly said the following. “The interestRate, margin, mandatoryCostRate, allInRate elements must be a positive decimal value only up to 12 digits with 15 levels of decimal precision.”
- In previous discussions we opted to make these fields negative or positive. Should we tighten those rules. Can anythone think of use cases where these values could be negative…? From the business working group it was mentioned that there are scenarios where the margin could be negative.

Regards,

Bhavik Katira

CEO

TenDelta™

Fresh insight. Pure logic.

www.tendelta.com

+1.917.582.4574 new york

+44.(0).7780.808732 london

TenDelta™ provides business process consulting, technology design & education services; specializing in the Syndicated Loan Market. Entrusted with engineering innovative & logical solutions; we endeavor to deliver timely, robust, cutting-edge results.

From: loanwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:loanwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bhavik Katira
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2010 9:44 AM
To: loanwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Loan FpML WG Meeting: 9 March 2010, 1000-1100EST (London Time: 3-4pm)

Dial-in Details

US: + 1 (888) 481 - 3032

Intl: + 1 (617) 801- 9600

UK: 0800 904-7961

Participant Code: 28413758

Agenda

1. Walk-through of all working group feedback items (as listed below). These proposals are included in the schema from GS attached.

2. Next Steps.

Updates to existing full schema and requirements document to follow.

Schema Feedback/Proposals (as illustrated in the attached schema)

1. PricingChangeNotice – For the OnGoingFeeRateChange structure review the choice structure between a simple price and a tiered price. This will allow support for scenarios such as utilization fees.

2. InterestPaymentNotice – Last time we discussed adding choice between an amount or PIK amount. We should also consider whether some of the accrual structures should be choices as well.

3. Trading structure proposed updates:

a. DealTrade: Proposal for field additions:
- ActualSettlementDate – Actual date that the settlement takes place. Only populated once settlement happens.
- WhenIssuedFlag – Need to identify when issued trades. i.e. traded before the credit agreement has been signed.
- BreakCostsFlag – Need to identify if break costs should apply.
- DelayedCompensationFlag – Need to identify if delayed compensation will apply (since by default it does)

b. Should we remove the otherTradeTerms field…?

c. DealTrade: Proposal for field changes:
- ParDistressedFlag – rename to documentationType and created DocumentationTypeEnum with values “Par” and “Distressed”. This should provide a more flexible way to model this concept.
- On buyerCounterparty and sellerCounterparty loanPartyContactType had attribute pricingChangeReasonScheme which looks like a mistake. Rename to loanContactPartyTypeScheme…?
- Can we abbreviate the AccrualSettlementEnum used by accrualSettlementType as follows:
Settled without Accrued Interest – SWOA
Settled with Accrued Interest – SWA
Trades Flat – Flat

d. Should we add Transfer Fee information?

Regards,

Bhavik Katira

CEO

TenDelta™

Fresh insight. Pure logic.

www.tendelta.com

+1.917.582.4574 new york

+44.(0).7780.808732 london

From: loanwg@xxxxxxxx [mailto:loanwg@xxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bhavik Katira
Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2010 2:54 AM
To: loanwg@xxxxxxxx
Subject: Loan FpML WG Meeting: 23 February 2010, 1000-1100EST (London Time: 3-4pm)

Dial-in Details

US: + 1 (888) 481 - 3032

Intl: + 1 (617) 801- 9600

UK: 0800 904-7961

Participant Code: 28413758

Agenda

3. Walk-through of all changes as noted in the requirements document (v1.41 attached).

a. Updated schema also attached.

4. Next Steps

a. Further updates/action items as a result of today’s walk-through.

b. Comparison of current development schema against 4.7 REC.

c. Creation of a 5.x version of the latest development schema.

Please save the attached files and remove the .mail extensions.

Regards,

Bhavik Katira

CEO

TenDelta™

Fresh insight. Pure logic.

www.tendelta.com

+1.917.582.4574 new york

+44.(0).7780.808732 london

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2704 - Release Date: 02/22/10 14:34:00

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.733 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2729 - Release Date: 03/08/10 02:34:00