venezuela

Via Gotham City we learn of a probe that FINMA, the Swiss financial watchdog, is doing on Julius Baer, one of the boliburgeoisie favourite money laundering banks.

$1,305,592,000,000 (please have this number in mind -one trillion, three hundred and five billion, five hundred and ninety-two million dollars- as you read through). Two very charitable chaps from Cleary Gottlieb, Richard J. Cooper and Mark A. Walker, have published a paper on Venezuela's debt, entitled "Venezuela's Restructuring: A Path Forward" (see below with added comments). It is work that shows the kinds of problems a future administration will have to deal with ($191.4 billion debt) in terms of pleasing the country's creditors.

Depending on where people stand in the political sphere, there's never a shortage of villains. In the UK, at this point in time, there's almost universal consensus about number 10's current resident. The fact that a fanboy of Castro and Chavez stands across the aisle shows just how debased politics can become, even in very advanced democracies. What hope then, for a banana republic like Venezuela?

Hugo Chavez used to rule through TV screens. Never one for orthodoxy, the putschist's command of telecasts was legendary. He rose to power thanks to his "por ahora" speech in 1992, calling rebel armed forces to surrender, and once in power, he commandeered airwaves like no one had ever done before, or since. Nicolas Maduro doesn't have that gift, his public addresses are very disagreable events. And then Venezuela has produced another first in Juan Guaidó: government by hashtag.

Expectedly the Lima Group just said it won't support military intervention in Venezuela. Nothing new there really. No South American nation is about to attack another, despite Venezuelans' baseless hopes to that effect. What puzzles is the lack of imagination that Juan Guaidó, Venezuela's opposition, and its coalition of friendly nations have shown thus far. U.S.

What's the point of imposing a sanctions regime against wretched Nicolas Maduro and leaving the back door open? This is a pertinent question in our opinion. Venezuela / PDVSA can not issue any more debt as per Executive  Order  13808 of August 24, 2017.

Social sciences scholars will look at Venezuela in the future as a sui generis case. A self-described socialist revolution, led by an idealistic military putschist, that managed to annihilate one of the best managed State-owned energy conglomerates the world has seen, producing along the way the largest humanitarian crisis to affect the Western Hemisphere. Out of nowhere, a fresh face (Congress Chair Juan Guaidó) emerged, gaining wide international support that moved from symbolic to real implications -for the existing regime- in a matter of hours. Every imaginable superlative applies.

The state of play is the following: Juan Guaidó, head of Venezuela's Congress, declared himself as caretaker president of the country. Guaidó based his move on an interpretation of article 233 of the Chavista Constitution, that establishes that when an absolute absence ("falta absoluta") happens by swearing in day (10 January), the Head of Congress must take charge and call for fresh elections within 30 days. Given that Nicolas Maduro's last electoral victory was not seen as legitimate, many countries pledged recognition to Guaidó, officially.

Solutions to Venezuela's miserable situation are, to put it decently, like belly buttons. This navel-gazing seems to be the pastime of choice of hasbeens, or batequebra'os as known in Venezuela. Rafael Ramirez, for instance, despite having squandered over one trillion USD, would like the world to see him as the potential saviour of Hugo Chavez's legacy, as if Venezuela hasn't suffered enough his corruption and the wretched chavista experiment. Then there's Luisa Ortega Diaz.

Ten days ago I had a conversation with a source, well versed on bonds stuff. He said a few institutional investors were going to court to trigger acceleration clause on the 2034 bond, for defaulting on payment. Today Reuters posted news about this, quoting a representative of a "group of creditors" (lawyer Mark Stancil with Washington DC firm Robbins Russell) seeking payment on $1.5 billion.