![]() ![]() DealBook got the first look at the broker’s 195-page response, which reiterated Robinhood’s previous comments about the capital constraints that forced it to halt trading in some stocks. Robinhood has responded to a long list of questions from Senator Elizabeth Warren about its businesses practices and what went wrong during the height of the meme-stock frenzy. The firm estimates that it has saved more than $15 million from those deals.įirst look: Robinhood responds to Senator Warren Carlyle has arranged more than $6 billion in E.S.G.-linked financing, including loans for the packaging firm Logoplaste tied to reduction in its emissions, the denim manufacturer Jeanologia linked to water savings and the gearbox maker Flender based on renewable power capacity. Linking private capital to environmental, social and governance goals. (Carlyle did not disclose the targets or the associated rates.) To help companies hire, Carlyle will tap its own database of executives along with partners like Catalyst and the Latino Corporate Directors Association. ![]() The three-year credit facility will tie the price of the debt it offers to interim targets on diversity. In a study of its portfolio companies, Carlyle found that firms with two or more diverse board members recorded annual earnings growth 12 percent higher than those with fewer diverse directors. as women and ethnic minorities, such as Black, Asian, Hispanic, Pacific Islander or Native American it defines them globally as women. The firm defines diverse members in the U.S. The credit facility is an extension of Carlyle’s goal for its portfolio company boards to have at least 30 percent diverse members by 2023. The facility, which the firm says is the largest of its kind in the U.S., is part of an “integrated approach to building better businesses,” according to the firm’s C.E.O., Kewsong Lee. Today, the private equity firm Carlyle will announce a $4.1 billion credit facility for its portfolio companies that ties the price of debt to the diversity of a company’s board. This has generated a fascinating debate here at DealBook, and we’d like to hear what you think: Email us at Include your name and location, and we may feature your response in a future newsletter.Įxclusive: Carlyle links debt costs to board diversity What responsibility do creditors have to the bank if it pays them back early? Since it was a mistake by the bank, why not return the money? Where do you stand? The decision - which Citi will probably appeal - raises thorny questions about rules versus principles: “On the other hand, if one party owes money to another and pays that money back to the penny, the latter should generally be allowed to keep and use the money as it wishes, without fear that the former will develop a case of borrower’s remorse and claim that the payment was by mistake.” “If one party sends money to another by mistake, the latter should generally be required to give it back.” “At its heart, this case involves a clash between two basic intuitive principles,” the judge said: “But there is nothing unfair about keeping that money when it’s owed.” “It’s one thing to mistakenly send money to someone with no entitlement to that payment,” he told DealBook. “New York law wants to discourage banks from making these kinds of mistakes,” said Adam Abensohn of Quinn Emanuel, who represented the asset managers. He might have ruled differently if he could “write on a blank slate,” but there were legal precedents supporting the defendants. Wait, what? The lenders argued that the transfers matched what they were owed, so they could have “reasonably thought the payments were intentional,” assuming that it would be “downright irrational” for Citi to make such a big mistake, the judge, Jesse Furman, concluded. ![]() Yesterday, unexpectedly, a New York federal judge said the firms could keep the cash, despite acknowledging that the money had been transferred in error. Some creditors promptly returned $400 million of the mistakenly wired money, but 10 others refused to return $500 million. ![]() Citigroup made a huge mistake last summer, when instead of transferring an $8 million interest payment from Revlon to its creditors, it transferred nearly $900 million of the bank’s own funds - the full amount of principal on the loan that wasn’t due for another few years. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |