We would love to hear your thoughts about our site and services, please take our survey here.
YPF SEC filing.
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/904851/000119312524106041/d818720d6k.htm
Hearing before Judge Preska rules? Appeal afterwards?
Getting smaller but more efficient?
https://latinfinance.com/daily-brief/2024/04/17/ypf-asset-sale-stirs-buyer-interest/
One last point on the Petersen companies' award: I am not aware, since it is private information, of the details of the original agreement between Burford and Petersen. The Spanish companies have creditors waiting to get paid once this proceeding is over. For instance, we know that Repsol holds a EUR 1.3 billion credit with the Petersens. So, it could be the case that Burford is contractually obligated to settle this case as a whole and cannot request Judge Preska to separate de award pending an investigation by the Argentine Congress.
Don't underestimate politics in Argentina. YPF is of a national interest and has always been a topic of corruption and mismanagement. Congress will not sign a check to judgment creditors until they fully know who will benefit. Offering to freeze Petersens' award is a way out, but, again, I am fully unaware if Burford can even propose this.
I anticipate the agreement unfolding in two stages: first, the establishment of the economic framework, and then its approval by Congress. Believe it or not, the initial phase appears relatively straightforward. Congress is the problem.
Regarding timing, I predict that the government and Burford may finalize the agreement's structure within this year, but congressional involvement will likely await the appellate court's decision.
Navigating a clear path forward is challenging, given the various potential outcomes. However, I remain convinced that Burford will need to propose freezing the 30% economic entitlement of the Petersen companies in an ESCROW account until Argentina completes an investigation into its ownership, that has not even started or proposed. Congress will most likely want to know if politicians are behind Petersen.
Lastly, keep an eye out for updates. Expect news to emerge shortly.
1) Nice catch! Article 29 (now referred as Article 55 in the new revised Decree) will be sent to Congress in April. For those who don't know about this Article, it gives the Executive Branch full powers to negotiate and settle "controversies" bypassing Congress. In any case, regardless of this Article, if I was advising Burford, judgment creditors should demand the Milei administration to put any settlement agreement in front of both chambers of Congress for approval. This will validate the settlement and avoid any future default with a new administration.
2) It should be but for now, it is not. The market doesn't seem to be bothered about the likelihood of YPF being brought back to the case and neither does YPF's management (at least publicly).
3) Honestly, I don't think this case will reach SCOTUS again. If it does, it will be because of the remote possibility of a setback in the appellate court by plaintiffs. I don't see Argentina once again filing for certiorari after not wining a single ruling in this case since April 2015. The longer Argentina waits to negotiate with Burford, the more interests it will incur and the less likelihood of securing a deep discount from the original award. Remember, with an appeal ruling in Burford's favor, I would not show much flexibility to negotiate a 40% - 50% discount.
Hope this helps.
Sometime before midnight Eastern Time today, Monday, judgment creditors will file a 90-page or so response to Argentina's Feb. 22 appeal and their own appeal to Judge Preska's ruling that relieved YPF of any wrongdoing.
The question is when or if plaintiffs will also have their own Amicus Curiae to respond Argentina's Amicus briefs filed by Brazil, Uruguay, Chile and Ecuador.
What happens when a country won't pay its debts?
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/slate-money/id876523888?i=1000649604489
Perhaps we are forgetting that the two most important beneficiaries of the 30% owned by the Madrid Petersen liquidators, are Repsol (EUR 1.35 billion) and the Anchorage Fund (unknown amount). I wouldn't be surprised if the Petersen companies still owe some monies to the Wall Street investment banks that initially financed the acquisition of YPF shares. Not much would be left (if any) for Argy politicians.
RIDER75:
1. Wait for Judge Preska to decide whether the Currency SWAP with China has sovereign immunity.
2. If she opines it doesn't, then wait for Argentina to produce the documents requested by plaintiffs (Burford) that Argentina is refusing to turn over.
3. Wait for plaintiffs (Burford) to evaluate the likelihood of having any chances of seizing the Currency SWAP.
4. If plaintiffs (Burford) conclude that they can, wait for them to file a Motion of Attachment with Judge Preska.
5. Wait for the judge to review it and then order the repatriation of the SWAP to the US for attachment.
6. Wait for Argentina to oppose the attachment of the SWAP (just like the Republic is doing right now in the Second Court of Appeals with a different attachment order issued by Judge Preska on a different case that Argentina is refusing to repatriate to the US).
7. Wait for the Second Circuit ruling.
In a few words, not much Burford can do.
Remember, all assets sought by Burford that are currently held by Republic IN Argentina, will take long time to get a hold of.
Hope this helps.
Milei will try to push something through Congress within a month. His administration is currently negotiating with the provinces' governors so their representatives vote in favor of the modified Omnibus Bill. Milei doesn't want any surprises this time around.
I am not sure whether Article 29 will be in the modified version of the Bill, but I cannot emphasize enough the importance that this Article carries in Burford's overall intention to collect payment. We are talking about an amicable administration that, with this Article, will be able to bypass Congress and settle with all beneficiaries of court-ordered awards.
All you should care about the Omnibus Bill is Chapter VII, Article 29: "Resolution of Domestic and International Disputes". If passed, it gives the President absolute powers to negotiate, structure, settle and pay any international dispute without going through Congress. It never had the chance to be voted. Second try soon.
Stay tuned.
Gtx1...from a Seb's report distributed to his clients regarding the new YPF bond.
US LITIGATION RISK
YPF proposed new international bond issue should not be affected by ongoing litigation in the US…for now. On March 31, 2023, New York Judge Loretta Preska relieved YPF of any wrongdoing in the expropriation case initiated by the Petersen companies and Eton Park Capital in 2015. As a result, it appears that the 2031s collateral will remain secure against attempts by the beneficiaries of the $16.1 billion court-ordered award to enforce the judgment and attach any royalties accumulated in the Export Collection Account. However, we opine that this assurance is applicable for the next nine-to-twelve months. Beyond this timeframe, the situation hinges on the Second Circuit Court of Appeals' decision regarding the plaintiffs’ pursuit to reintroduce YPF to the case.
Following Argentina's appeal filed in November to contest the March 31 ruling, the beneficiaries of the YPF judgment lodged their own appeal challenging the oil and gas company's exoneration. The outcome, dependent on the three-judge panel's decision, could potentially involve YPF being reintegrated into the case. Consequently, its assets, particularly those situated abroad—such as the Export Collection Account—could be susceptible to attachment if the Republic fails to reach an agreement with claimants before this juncture.
We are not discouraging the acquisition of the 2031s. However, we are outlining a sequence of events that could potentially create a challenging situation for YPF by year-end. YPF, who incentivized investors to acquire its new bonds by offering guarantees, may face the possibility of these guarantees being susceptible to attachment by beneficiaries of the YPF Expropriation Case judgment.
According to US Courts, the Second Circuit has an overturn rate of 9.2%, indicating that the likelihood of a successful appeal by plaintiffs is low. Nevertheless, the YPF Expropriation Case has offered multiple twists and turns throughout its almost nine-year history and, as long as the appeal remains pending, there’s a probability of the company being brought back into the case and its assets subject to attachment efforts.
When and if any attachment effort occurs, YPF will fight any attempts to seize its assets (including the ECA) in the courts.
What makes you think they are not already talking? Do you believe they will publicly announce it?
Burford will get paid, but it will take quite a long time.
Let me break some news for you: Burford's shareholders are not a priority for President Milei. He was elected because he had an agenda, not because he was going to settle with beneficiaries of the YPF judgment first thing out of the gate. I do believe the YPF case should be a priority, but it is not.
Mr. Milei wants to get rid of this issue asap. But he can't. He cannot pledge assets (Congress will not approve it) and he cannot commit to any payment because Argentina doesn't have the means.
Again, this will take time.
You want to enforce the judgment? Go ahead. It is quite a difficult thing to do. The easiest part is finding assets. If they are located in the US, better. However, Argentina currently has a $450 million attachment order from Judge Preska that Argentina has appealed. Argentina will appeal any attachment order in the US. Yes, a parallel appeal to the YPF ongoing appeal.
If the assets are overseas, you will need a local court to recognize a foreign judgment. Again, time consuming.
If you a BUR shareholder, enjoy the ride. It's going to be a wild one.