Barbados Pushing Back on External Creditors

Some have been following the intense negotiations in motion between the government of Barbados and external bondholders. Whether one agrees with the decision of the Mottley government to trigger SD, the bottomline is that this is where we find ourselves and ALL Barbadians must support the effort of the government through its agent White Oaks to close the best deal for the country.

Barbados is not the first country to trigger SD and will not be the last, let us get over it. Debt restructure comes in all shapes and sizes, if we breath some life into the economy the opportunity to improve credit ratings will come.

It is unfortunate some members of the political class prefer to nitpick instead of rallying around the flag at this juncture. The decision was made, move on!

White Oak is being paid very well to negotiate the best deal for Barbados. They have done similar deals for other countries and the principals are known to those sitting across the table. That some will want Barbados to cave to the creditors because we are the defaulter and therefore should accept terms offered by the lender is nonsense.

However this blogmaster agrees there is a need to demystify the matter for the average Barbadian to  assist with informing a national debate on the ramifications of a protracted negotiation.

Here is another article planted in the international press by the other side to pressure the government of Barbados.

-David, Barbados underground

Creditors prepare to push back on Barbados debt proposal

By Miluska Berrospi

NEW YORK, June 12 (IFR) – Investors are preparing to push back on a restructuring proposal released this week by the government of Barbados, sources told IFR on Wednesday.

After months of discussions with creditors, the government, which suspended debt payments last year, laid out on Tuesday two options for holders of its 7.25% 2021s, 7% 2022s and 6.625% 2035s.

But creditors, which had feared the government would launch an exchange without their consent, said such terms were unsatisfactory.

“We hope that before they actually launch an offer, the government will re-approach us and try to reengage in conversations,” said an investor involved in the process.

“If they launch something we’re prepared to reject it and wait,” he added.

The creditor committee comprising both dollar bond and loan holders are preparing a response for later this week, sources said.

“The government of Barbados has improved the proposed terms as much as it possibly can given its commitment under the IMF-support program,” the Barbados government said in a statement on Tuesday.

In October 2018, the International Monetary Fund (IMF)approved a US$290m bailout for the Caribbean nation.

“We are disappointed that they’re taking the tone that they are. We think it’s damaging to the country and to foreign investment,” added the investor.

Creditors would have about three weeks to respond were the government to launch a formal exchange offer on the options presented.

No payments have been made on outstanding debt since Prime Minister Mia Mottley took office in May of last year.

The country restructured around Bds$12bn (US$6bn) of domestic last October.

https://www.nasdaq.com/article/creditors-prepare-to-push-back-on-barbados-debt-proposal-20190612-00956

 

221 comments

  • A patriotic report. Could be mine. Quite different from the dagger blows of the ISO Taliban and Barrow´s party.

    Our beloved Prime Minister must now stand firm. She must not be misled by the blue and green syndicate or the traitor Worrell.

    Like

  • David

    ”””””””’ALL Barbadians must support the effort of the government through its agent White Oaks to close the best deal for the country.””””””

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    We cannot agree with this statement. It is a statement you have often made. And again we seek to push back strenuously against a perceived dictatotial impulse.

    The people of Barbados should only offer support to this or any other government if in their judgement such is warranted.

    That attitude of seeking universal support for painful policies cannot be in the interests of our country for a number of reasons.

    Included amongst these would the need for a thinking public which cannot be or should not be shepherded like sheeple to any particular policy, especially when such policies are undoubtedly painful, like this one is.

    Even at this time of a national economic emergency, what we need most are critically thinking people, providing government with the widest number of opinions, not all of us as blind followers of Mugabe. And we’re saying this as supporters of the said economic policy, as espoused.

    .

    Liked by 2 people

  • @Pachamama

    Some decisions have to be made such that consensus will never be practical. What must occur is transparency in how the decision was made etc.

    Like

  • I belive the people made a decision for change but not a change that would find the image of barbados being drawn into international courts to pay its debt
    The people have already been subjected to a take it our leave it decisions by this as govt unilteral decision to default on local debt found many bond holders money hijacked by govt to pay govt debt
    Now asking people to bow at the altar of patriotism is more than a little too much

    Liked by 1 person

  • Hi David:

    There has never been any nit picking from Solutions Barbados. We have repeatedly stated that we hope that the DLP (when in office), and now the BLP, are successful in implementing responsible policies, because if they win, we win.

    Barbados is proposing a significant ‘hair cut’ for external creditors. We should all hope that the external creditors accept it, because if they do, we win. If White Oak are the muscle that we have hired to get them to agree, then fine. We also have no problem with their fee of US$2.7M for the external debt.

    Our main problem is with the local debt. There was no ‘muscle’ required. The Government simply decided to confiscate part of our retirement savings and pensions, and passed a law to make the confiscation legal.

    We had no say in the matter, since our money is managed by the banks and NIS, who voted against our interests. For that, we are paying White Oak an absurd and outrageous US$24M – putting ourselves further in foreign-currency debt.

    We did not need White Oak ‘muscle’ to stare down local creditors on the local debt (that would be all of us). The BLP, with a 30-0 majority, had all of the muscle it needed to force Barbadians to accept whatever they came up with. What part of that do you not understand? This is not insignificant.

    We expect Tron to sycophantly applaud the BLP’s every irresponsible action, and attack anyone he thinks threatens the BLP’s re-election campaign, otherwise he will be in serious trouble. Therefore, his irresponsible comments should always be interpreted in that context. However, we need you to remain independent and provide an independent analysis.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Piece the Legend

    @ Pachamama the Sojourner

    I was saying the same thing.

    Imagine this is the attitude the BLP’

    He says “…It is unfortunate some members of the political class prefer to nitpick instead of rallying around the flag at this juncture.

    The decision was made, move on!…”

    A man drives a ZR van over your foot and a next man telling you to “Get over it”

    So the BLP ‘s Minister of Disinformation has been assigned the task of forcing bajans to accept lock stock and barrel THEIR VERSION of the trickery and to condition responses

    But you recognised this modus OPERANDUM and are making people aware

    Liked by 1 person

  • NorthernObserver

    This is like playing darts in the dark?
    why do we need a conclusion tomorrow? Today it isn’t costing us, other than WO is still under contract, and they have already made the lion share of their contract monies.
    I suspect the hope is somebody folds, as keeping together when there are a myriad of debt instruments involved, isn’t easy. Somebody needs closure before another. Somebody has less exposure than another.

    Like

  • LUST

    Must we support the negotiations for debt restructuring?
    Absolutely.
    The interest rate on this debt should be in the region of 3.29% not 6% or 7.25%
    Let White Oak and the Government do their job and let us support them 100%.

    What is not being said publically is that one of the demands by the holders of our debt is to try to force the Government to float the BDS dollar. Let us all pray that this is not done as we do not want to pay BDS 6 for USD 1 or like Jamaica JAM 140 to USD 1.

    CUT, CUT, CUT
    To try things around we must increase tourism arrivals and at the same time cut both the food and oil import bill.

    TOURISM
    Tourism increases today are usually socially driven and so everyone can help.
    An quick and easy step for all is to use a smart phone and a social media account and post inviting pictures ( beach, sea, landscape, people) of Barbados at least once weekly. Daily if possible, with hash tags to the http://www.visitbarbados.org site or to local information or specific sites like http://www.barbadosgolfclub.com , https://www.mountgayrum.com/, http://www.barbmuse.org.bb/web/, http://harrisonscave.com/, https://www.stnicholasabbey.com/
    Those who have time can suggest other site for all to refer to.

    Barbados should become the world leader in free and open social tourism marketing by its people.

    FOOD
    Reducing the food import bill means every household growing more in a garden, kitchen garden or fields. This is an easy campaign to sell.

    OIL
    The way to reduce the Light & Power oil import bill is to generate electricity using solar power.
    Give us importation of photovoltaic (PV) panels duty free. Set up courses for small businesses to learn to install and maintain the solar power industry. Help ALL homes – big or small to install PV panels on their roofs, churches, schools, government buildings, warehouses etc

    None of the above are new but need to be repeated over and over again.

    My slogan is simply. “Let us save the dollar” or LUST (the d is silent)

    Like

  • Blindly supporting corrupt governments and their self-serving policies have the MAJORITY population being treated like SECOND CLASS CITIZENS IN BARBADOS by their own wicked governments for over 50 years….when will we learn.

    Liked by 1 person

  • William Skinner

    For years on BU all we heard about the mismanagement of the economy and the dangers of multiple downgrades. We heard nothing about patriotism and rallying behind the flag. The Bees mantra was to kick out the Dees.The people responded and correctly did that.
    Today a rush decision by Mottley to suspend paying debts has thrown the country into international embarrassment. We are being told to be patriotic and rally behind the flag. The Dees are saying that the country has been betrayed.
    There is a perverse hypocrisy here. The first fact that we must accept is that the move to stop paying our debts was ill conceived and the negative fall out from this decision was not explained to the country and is only now being exposed.
    It is also extremely ignorant to pretend that the debtor can set the tone and the creditor must agree . It is an arrogant position set in an almost unbelievable delusional mindset.
    This is the exact stupidity mouthed by Stuart when he foolishly asserted that the downgrades were not stopping the schools from being opened and the buses were still running.

    The more things change the more they remain the same.

    Duopoly Rules

    Liked by 2 people

  • @William

    Where is the hypocrisy? Fair minded people on the blog including the blogmaster asked commenters to give Thompson and to a degree Stuart at least a year to do the job. The criticism came when the DLP, the most incompetent lot to have been elected to government, committed blunder after blunder. Worse of all did not see communication with the public as a priority. Time to let that period be firmly sealed in the political dustbin of history and move on.

    Like

  • William Skinner

    @ David
    Move on from where ? Your comments can only be directed toward those who have never moved on from the Bees and Dees. As you know I have long condemned them to the political hell.
    Wherever and whenever I have made it a point almost a mission, to show up the hypocrisy in both camps.
    You chose your words and left them for interpretation. Even your proud defender Pacha took umbrage to how you literally demanded that the populace accept this brazen act of policy ignorance or less be deemed unpatriotic.
    It is you who seem to be eternally trapped in the quagmire of the BLPDLP. It is you who need to move on and see the duopoly for what it is.
    You don’t have the ability to get me involved or become a victim of your staunch defence of the decadent political class. Your guile attempts to divide and rule .You are a defender of all the decadence wrought on this country by these two parties.
    You my dear brother need to move on . Ask Pacha to help you . I know he moved on a long time ago.

    Liked by 1 person

  • David
    Worse of all did not see commuincation to the public as a priority
    ——–”’-”——–

    But were and when has this govt been communicating on this matter and also on the matter of Liat
    Both these issues were being hidden out of the glare of public
    Only to be exposed in outside media sources
    Now public is being told to rally around the flag even when govt has not been transparent on the issue of external debt

    Liked by 1 person

  • @William

    The blogmaster is a Barbadian first!

    The call to rally was made in context.

    The decision to SD was made, we have to deal with it.

    Bickering about the decision adds nothing to moving the country from the economic precipice we now find ourselves.

    Calling for Barbadians to rally does not suggest we let the government off the hook about transparency etc.

    For the record the blogmaster has an opinion which may or may not be influenced by some on the blog. The fact Pacha has disagreed should mean what ?

    The DLP failed on the job, this can be measured by any KPI you select. The result of the last general election confirms the majority of Bajans agree with this position. Let us rally to rebuild the country. You may want a third party movement to take root, however, last time we checked the seeds of that movement are not showing shoots.

    Like

  • “White Oak is being paid very well to negotiate the best deal for Barbados. They have done similar deals for other countries and the principals are known to those sitting across the table. That some will want Barbados to cave to the creditors because we are the defaulter and therefore should accept terms offered by the lender is nonsense.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    If the “White Oak” is such a well-paid and highly-rated negotiating lubricant why are these “External Creditors” digging in their heels so deeply?

    Is it because they feel justified in demanding their pound of Bajan excessively fat flesh as advised by the doctor De Liar?

    How can the Bajan government ‘beg’ for debt ease or forgiveness when the country continues to live high off the importation luxury hog?

    Why should creditors ease up on Barbados while the country borrows from the IMF to continue the importation of luxury-range vehicles, tap water in plastic bottles, mock hair and false ‘bottoms’?

    Why not make the importers and consumers of these ‘show-off’ goods and ‘bling’ items find their own foreign money instead of taking up IMF-borrowed forex for which the poor are being asked to carry the heaviest burden in the repayment of these loans?

    Liked by 2 people

  • It is also extremely ignorant to pretend that the debtor can set the tone and the creditor must agree . It is an arrogant position set in an almost unbelievable delusional mindset
    xxxxxxxxxxxx

    LET ME ADD STUPID AND BACKWARD THINKING TO THE ABOVE.

    Liked by 2 people

  • David

    How many times must we retort that transparency means nothing unless we can then take corrective actions with timely information. A right to recall.

    We renew our trenchant criticism of your oft repeated demand for all Bajans to support any government at any point in time purely under the rubric of a misguided nationalism.

    When you do this you’re sounding just like the neo-fascists now in bogue elsewhere. They pretend a nationalism as well!

    Like

  • @Pacha

    Transparency in the context of the transaction being discussed. Agree with you if we discuss in the context of governance.

    @Miller

    Do we know what are the issues delaying final agreement?

    Like

  • A closure to this negotiation must come as a matter of urgency. The manner in which W0 dealt with the foreign creditors has caused them to push back and the issue has moved from negotiation to a confrontation. The creditors have not received a cent in 12 months and are now being told not to look for any payment for at least another 12. Pray tell what part of that approach is a negotiation?

    We have been told that what separates the acceptance of the deal by our government is the fact that we would reach our goal 1 year later if we did so. No one has however told us what the risk of not accepting the deal will mean to us long term, if we end up like Argentina and are black listed by the international creditors going forward. Should this occur would the 1 year delay of been worth it?

    White Oak needs to be told by the government to settle the deal now, before we as a country reach the stage that the international market views us as unsavoury to do business with. If you read between the lines they are already hinting at that . As for WO they need to realise that every gravy train must come to an end, say thank you for the $85000 USD they have gotten monthly for doing little and now bring this matter to a close.

    In closing let me say it has nothing to do with rallying around a flag blindly like sheep. Any banker will tell you if you run into trouble with a loan still pay something, regardless how small till the loan can be renegotiated. That was not done here. Thus started the bad blood which was further brought to boil when the said creditors learnt the astronomical amount WO were being paid. The said payment which indirectly came from them.

    If for argument sake you had a tenant who told you they couldn’t pay their rent for the next 6months and begged for an ease, only to then bring a brand new Toyota and park it in your driveway how would you take it?

    The old Bajan saying of ” what start wrong end wrong” is therefore applicable here.

    Liked by 3 people

  • @ Pachamama June 17, 2019 8:30 AM
    “We renew our trenchant criticism of your oft repeated demand for all Bajans to support any government at any point in time purely under the rubric of a misguided nationalism.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    And what makes this jingoistic call to rally around the flag of pure Bajan financial mismanagement so hard to heed is the fact that the persons who benefited most from these lavish foreign loans are still not being asked to pull their weight and contribute more to the national collection plate to aid in the country’s fiscal recovery.

    Why are ‘ordinary’ land tax owners being made to cough up more to bail out the fiscally-challenged government while a man who promises to build an imaginary hotel drives around in a ‘big-able’ duty-free Mercedes bought from overseas with some of the same money borrowed from the same foreign creditors the government now want to paint as big bad wolves.

    Liked by 2 people

  • @ Miller

    Well said sir

    Like

  • @John A

    On what basis can a payment be made if negotiations are ongoing?

    Like

  • @ David.

    If we can agree that the intention was to renegotiate a loan and not permanently default on it, what could have been done is a smaller good will payment could have been made with the understanding the payments would be lcredited to the new loan agreement.

    This works daily say when one uses an overdraft facility with a company. If you are renegotiating the overdraft for what ever reason, one would still pay the retainer annual fees for the facility so as to stay in good standing with the bank. It’s standard practice in business daily for this to happen.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @John

    A new loan agreement has to be consummated to facilitate payment. By defaulting the old terms do not apply.

    Note also WO will be negotiating based on brief received from government.

    Like

  • When our or by the time “beloved” BLOGMASTER wakes up to the fact these “negotistions” are but a GAME OF POKER and the OFFSHORE lenders have a HAND OF ACES. The other fly in the ointment is the new lender, IMF, have added new rules to the POKER game, however the OFFSHORE lenders and Barbados are playing by the old rules and have not agreed to the new IMF doctoran.

    Guess what the outcomes likely go be, OFFSHORE lenders are going to stand FIRM, IMF IS GOING TO STAND FIRM, BARBADOS losses and the Mickey Mouse $ will no longer be excepted even in Monopoly.

    SOVERGIEN DEFAULT BECOMES SOVERGIEN FAILURE.

    Liked by 1 person

  • The whole reason for hiring white oak was for them to ” negotiate ” a restructuring not dictate one!

    Had they used an approach like what I suggested the door of negotiation would have been open to go from there. Instead they went the road of strong arming the creditors by saying ” not a blind cent for 24 months and if wunna don’t like it too bad.” I really don’t see how that approach could encourage negotiation when they in turn drew $85000USD a month.

    I keep saying they are too many similarities with how WO is handling this matter and how Argentina dealt with their issue for it to end well, if further protraction of a settlement occurs.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @John A

    Why do you believe that WO is not negotiating? The fact that it is taking time is a feature of a tough negotiation.

    Like

  • @ David.

    ” white oak is not negotiation on briefs from government”. REALLY!

    Well they better dam well remember them working for government and if they are told to close a matter and they don’t do so then just fire dem ass.

    That is a ludicrous statement and flies in the face of logic as it implies employee can refuse to see the demands of the employer through. If that is the case then termination is the next option.

    Like

  • @ David

    Taking time is one thing but what is the fallout to this? These creditors are being asked to ” wait while we take our time, oh and wunna ain t getting a cent in the meantime”. How could that approach benefit anyone in terms of a negotiation?

    Also I would love to hear what “progress ” has been made as the said creditors have complained they have not been communicated with properly and not 1 single loan has been restructured to date with the said creditors.

    If that is progress please define failure for me.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @John A

    No one is knocking your concern for the country to close with external creditors. The government has said publicly the kind of deal they want with the creditors is critical to the stabilization plan. All negotiations are done within parameters by both sides. It is not unusual for wedge issues to surface in hard negotiations. A year is long we agree, let us hope WO can do what they are being paid handsomely to do.

    Like

  • Not only that they do it but that it be done without long term fall out to us as a country. Because of their approach if we end up being blacklisted by international creditors as was done to Argentina, then the whole foreign debt restructuring would be no more than a long term financial disaster for us.

    People need to understand the serious crossroad we are at now with this matter. If WO makes the mistake and takes the wrong turn now we will pay a massive price for it in both the medium and long term availability to favourable financing.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ David June 17, 2019 9:45 AM.
    “A year is long we agree, let us hope WO can do what they are being paid handsomely to do.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    The Judicial Manager(s) were also paid handsomely to do for CLICO what WO is being paid just as handsomely to do for BrekBados.

    Dr Deliar Worrell has already disclosed the inevitable outcome of these protracted negotiations. WO is just stalling the inevitable status of the Bajan dollar:

    Devaluation is the only way of bringing Bajans to their home base of commonsense by forcing them to live within their means.

    The “Wily Coyote” has put it snugly in a nutshell as to what lies ahead when he posits:

    “@ Wily Coyote June 17, 2019 9:24 AM
    When our or by the time “beloved” BLOGMASTER wakes up to the fact these “negotistions” are but a GAME OF POKER and the OFFSHORE lenders have a HAND OF ACES. The other fly in the ointment is the new lender, IMF, have added new rules to the POKER game, however the OFFSHORE lenders and Barbados are playing by the old rules and have not agreed to the new IMF doctoran.

    Guess what the outcomes likely go be, OFFSHORE lenders are going to stand FIRM, IMF IS GOING TO STAND FIRM, BARBADOS losses and the Mickey Mouse $ will no longer be excepted even in Monopoly.

    SOVERGIEN DEFAULT BECOMES SOVERGIEN FAILURE.”

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Miller

    You would have heard Minister Straughn last week admitting that an ugly sum was paid to the judicial managers?

    He further revealed that the former government disobeyed the recommendation to liquidate. Instead the matter was tossed to the courts.

    Like

  • William Skinner

    Finally some now understand the difference between nationalism, patriotism and senseless political party posturing.
    Finally……..,,,

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ William

    I have said on another discussion that the foreign debt restructuring is the single most important issue that Barbados has to now confront and I defy any party loyalist to tell me different based on what is at risk.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @John A
    Why do you believe that WO is not negotiating?

    @ JOHN A.
    It was a question not a statement. cool down!

    Like

  • @ David June 17, 2019 10:14 AM

    Minister Straughn also promised there will be ‘harsh’ penalties on those SOE’s which fail to submit annual reports with their audited financials as has been required Law for donkey years.

    On whom would these penalties be imposed? The politically appointed yard-fowls to sit in the Big Chair of these Boards or the CEO’s who are also politically-appointed chickens?

    It would be interesting to know what is the ‘current’ status of those same SOE’s reports for the financial year ended March 31, 2017.

    Why can’t the same Minister Staughn shed some light on his efforts to collect the thousands of dollars not yet collected on the vehicle assigned to a ghost called Sales Director of an imaginary Hyatt hotel?

    Liked by 1 person

  • Note also WO will be negotiating based on brief received from government.

    Like

  • @ John 2

    My response was to point out while they work at a snail’s paste the creditors are being hung out to dry.

    If they are working, be it at a snail’s paste why is it that a year later not 1 single foreign loan has been successfully rescheduled?

    To say they taking their time is therefore a gross understatement. Being a tax payer I am by extension stating my dissatisfaction with their performance as my employee.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ john A

    Sovereign default
    The failure or refusal of a government to pay back its debt in full. It may be accompanied by a formal declaration of a government not to pay (repudiation) or only partially pay its debts (due receivables), or the de facto cessation of due payments. Also called insolvency.

    Like

  • @ John 2

    Also if they are negotiating on brief received from government then government needs to come out and explain why they are deliberately dragging their feet on this matter.

    Either way we the people need an explanation today and not tomorrow.

    Liked by 1 person

  • I assume that ALL the creditors will have to abide with the terms of the final agreement.
    like the local creditors all got the same terms.

    Like

  • @ John 2

    I can therefore draw only one of 2 conclusions based on what has been said.

    Firstly WO is receiving directions from government to settle which they are not following.

    Secondly they are not settling because they are not receiving instructions from government to do so.

    Either way seeing that as a tax payer I am in fact employing all of them I need to be told what is the hold up.

    Do we have a situation where WO has been advised to do so and are not? Or do we have a situation where WO have advised government to settle and they have refused?

    Either way we want to know!

    Like

  • John 2

    You do not negotiate in public.
    How do you know they are dragging their feet?
    Are the creditors also dragging their feet with their push back?

    We all would like this chapter of our history to be over ASAP but do you know how long it takes to negotiate something like this?
    I was informed that it took over a year for grenada to restructure it debt.

    Like

  • William Skinner

    @ John A
    This discussion is following the same trend , when it was argued that we actually told the IMF what we wanted and how we wanted it. The gullible were brainwashed into believing that we told the IMF the terms while begging them to assist us.
    Same today more brainwashing: we can now tell the people we owe how are going to settle the debt.
    You owe me money and you telling me how you’re going to pay me and I can like or lump it.
    If you dismiss this approach as pure hogwash you are being told that we are all Barbadians and we need to rally around the broken trident.
    Well let’s be frank here : Refusing to pay debts is really in the same boat as multiple downgrades.
    Six and half dozen.

    Duopoly Rules

    Liked by 1 person

  • Vincent Codrington

    A classic example of a straw man. Somebody is going to get “huff”. Let us hope it is not the citizens of this country. Pardon the mixed metaphors. The more the monkey climbs the better he is exposing his “Rs”.

    Like

  • John A.

    Last info I read was that government had “sweetened” the deal offered to the creditors.

    I don’t know how you are jumping to a any party advising another to “settle” as yet.

    Like

  • @William

    Your last comment is a disingenuous one. All agree that negotiating with external creditors is complicated. The general public for obvious reasons is not plugged into the challenges being managed at the table. All agree we need to close the deal but unlike the local debt restructure the external was always going to be a challenge. A mistake Mia made was to set expectations that it was a routine transaction.

    Like

  • Regardless to the excuses , sorry reasons for failure to meet a settlement it is irrelevant to the foreign creditors as they have been told fellows ” wunna ain’t seeing a red cent for 24 months ” . Indeed a good approach to negotiation some might argue who support rallying around the loyalist flag at any cost.

    Let me ask you one final question. If you lend a friend a $1000 and he promises to pay you and don’t what should happen next? Would you prefer he tell you that ” I going pay you when I find money”? Or would you prefer he says look ” I going pay you $50 A month and when I get money pay the balance off”?

    By your own admission in your comment of 10.54 you stated that to address the ” due receivables ” was also an option. Why therefore could a good negotiator not encompass an approach that could of done both?

    Sorry can’t except the argument that better could not have been done. It did not have to be an all or nothing approach.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ John 2

    It took Canada seven years to negotiate a trade agreement with the EU. This will give you an idea.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ William

    Yes you are right it is the same warmed over soup explanation

    @ Vincent.

    We have discussed this before and as we said then anytime you ask too many questions you anti-government. No problem I will be anti government then but pro state.
    You know them comments of party loyalty only annoy independent thinkers and cause them to hail an early ZR! LOL

    Liked by 1 person

  • @John A

    Where is your comment asking too many questions coming from?

    You asked to have your concerns about this matter and it was done. We all are concerned, that said, some agree it is not a slam dunk. Some agree we need to voice respective concerns. Why can’t all perspectives content without labeling people?

    The government is pushing for the best deal and the creditors are doing same. It is a process precedent suggest can be difficult. Again let us hop WO can close the matter.

    Like

  • @ David

    I am making a general statement that when one questions things government related you are called anti government. You know that too as just yesterday you posted on the blog the article about Argentina’s fall out from delaying their debt payments as a point of general education, I thanked you for doing it and a blogger came and asked me why I thanking you for!

    They are some that cuss you for not being critical and then they are some that will cuss you for asking questions.

    Fortunately I am blessed to be able to ignore all.

    Like

  • A

    You keep putting out this thing about personal loans and keep thing the same conditions applies to sovereign loans.

    If Barbados is due to pay back $100 on a loan ($1000) tomorrow and tomorrow comes and it can only pay back $50 then (my limit knowledge) it has defaulted on that loan ( and it a whole different kettle of fish).

    What Barbados is trying to do is much more complex than your personal loans analogies – multiple (loans) defaults and restructuring of these loans.

    My limited understanding!

    Like

  • keep thinking

    Like

  • @John A

    You will always have dissenting perspectives motivated for different reasons. You have to remain focused is right.

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    @ John2

    Why should the principles attached to a personal loan differ from a personal loan?

    Like

  • Vincent Codrington

    Sorry. That should have been : “Why should the principles attached to a personal loan differ from a Sovereign loan?”

    Like

  • @ John 2

    However you dress it up the outcome is the same . The creditors have not seen a cent nor will they see one for another 24 months.

    They don’t want to hear our problems what they do want is their money or at least some small token payment towards it.

    The same ethics that apply to loan payments are there for ALL loans. Pay me something better than paying me nothing. The option was there to do that as you confirmed. We chose not to so now we await the consequences.

    That is the facts whether some like it or not and I rest my case on this point.

    Like

  • @ David.

    Yes you are correct as Wlilliam says you just got to ignore those who attempt to deflect knowledge for what ever reason.

    I

    Like

  • VINCE
    Make your point!

    I think I have stated what I wanted to about A personal loans analogies. If I am wrong feel free to educate me!

    Liked by 1 person

  • A
    If the want to see at AT LEAST A SMALL SUM. then the best thing for them to do is to settle ASAP

    Don’t you think?
    why drag it out if you want AT LEAST A SMALL SUM ?

    The sooner you settle the sooner you see your money.

    Like

  • It is over a year since WO was hired to restructure and if not one loan deal has been accomplished, then there are questions to be asked of WO. We must not forget that WO gets $85k US per month agreement or no agreement. The longer this renegotiation takes, the more money in WO pockets. All who drew up the terms and conditions for WO was working in WO favour. I suspect the little short guy with the phony accent.

    Like

  • A person loan can be cleared through bankruptcy?

    Can a sovereign loan be cleared through bankruptcy?

    Like

  • A group of personal loans can be consolidated ?

    Can a group of sovereign loans be consolidated?

    Like

  • @ Dame Bajans June 17, 2019 12:12 PM
    “The longer this renegotiation takes, the more money in WO pockets. All who drew up the terms and conditions for WO was working in WO favour. I suspect the little short guy with the phony accent.”
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

    So you also smell the rat which is nibbling at the Bajan taxpayers- made cheese from a foreign currency which has to be paid into foreign accounts?

    What a rat of a bull-shitter who made a good nest egg at the Four Seasons abject failure!

    Like

  • Puerto Rico has struck a deal with its bondholders on how to restructure $35bn of debt, which could allow the island to emerge from bankruptcy in early 2020 after three painful years in financial limbo.
    Resolution of the US commonwealth’s debt pile has been complicated by its size, complexity, Puerto Rico’s knotty legal status and the destruction caused by Hurricane Maria in 2017.
    But on Sunday, its Financial Oversight and Management Board announced that a restructuring framework had finally been agreed with bondholders.
    Puerto Rico first began defaulting on some of its debts in 2015, but had to declare a full moratorium on payments three years ago. The oversight board was created as part of the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management and Economic Stability Act of 2016, or Promesa, which was designed to help the stricken statelet back to health.
    The deal will turn about $35bn of Puerto Rican debt into $12bn of bonds that are payable over the next three decades. Including principal repayment and interest, this will more than halve the island’s debt servicing to $21bn over the next 30 years, according to estimates from the oversight board.
    “The people of Puerto Rico will finally be able to live without the uncertainty of unsustainable government debt that so profoundly affected the commonwealth’s ability to attract investors, create jobs and economic growth,” Jose Carrión, the board’s chairman, said in a statement.
    The agreement entails a greater than 60 per cent haircut on the overall $35bn debt burden, a 36 per cent cut on “general obligation” bonds issued before 2012, and 27 per cent being shaved off the value of public authority bonds that carry a constitutional guarantee on payment.
    It follows a restructuring agreement for Puerto Rico’s sales tax-backed Cofina bonds in February, and accords struck earlier in the week with the local pension body on $55bn of pension claims and unions on collective bargaining and retirement.
    Together they will reduce annual debt service payments from $4.2bn a year to under $1.5bn.Puerto Rico’s oversight board plans to file an economic adjustment plan for the island within the next 30 days, and to formally emerge from bankruptcy by early 2020.
    “We have fought hard for the interests of the people of Puerto Rico and we are glad to have reached a consensual agreement with creditors that lowers Puerto Rico’s total debt burden and its annual debt payments significantly,” Natalie Jaresko, the oversight board’s executive director, said in the statement.
    “These were tough negotiations and we are confident we reached the best deal possible for Puerto Rico to move on from decades of incurring debt we could not afford,” she added.(Quote)

    Like

  • NorthernObserver

    Murdah. Pleased its not the BU bloggerati negotiating or we would fold like a house of cards. You have to s-t-r-etch them out, the fact they r complaining to foreign media shows their frustration.

    Like

  • @ john 2 June 17, 2019 12:23 PM

    In order to get some kind of ‘buy-in’ from the man in the Bajan street wouldn’t it be ‘transparently’ nice to get a schedule showing the amount(s) owed to each creditor/bondholder, the name of the bondholder and the reason(s) for which the loan was taken?

    Then ‘ordinary’ Bajans in whom the Barrow government invested much intellectual capital would know the reason(s) for the sacrifice they are being corralled to make.

    Liked by 1 person

  • One cannot discount that in Puerto agreement that there might have been a plausible connection taken into account the realities of the devastation brought to Puerto Rico during the hurricane
    What we see happening in barbados is a govt thumbing its nose at the external creditors all the while crying broke yet was able to find money to hire mulitmillon advisors
    Earlier in the negotiations the creditors did rake govt over the coals for such an expense

    Like

  • The upside is that we have Barbadians paying an interesting in the deal to restructure with external creditors. Some for the wrong reasons. If we can bottle this interest as it applies to financial matters generally. It is no secret Barbadians, including the media is considered financial illiterates.

    Like

  • PR was defaulting two years before the hurricane

    Like

  • @ Mariposa June 17, 2019 1:01 PM

    Ms Many Pussies, didn’t the last DLP administration, with you singing alto in its choir, constantly blame the previous OSA administration for the current financial millstone around the Bajan taxpayers’ neck?

    So why didn’t your mercurial managers restructure the foreign debt portfolio instead of pushing the national debt from approx. $8 billion to over $15 billion?

    But what can we expect from a politically overrated and obese jackass called Stinkliar who couldn’t tell the difference between a decimal of a fraction of 0.03 and a % of 0.07.

    The Deliar doctor Worrell is having his comeuppance on both his loving DLP and his hated BLP.

    Do you remember when the same ‘worried’ Worrell used to blame the annual drop in foreign reserves on the Dodds prisons in order to justify visits to the foreign loan-sharks?

    It’s Time to face reality. Barbados is broke and it’s time you ‘poor-great’ Bajans face reality.
    You can no longer live the ‘sweet life’ buy borrowing other people’s money.

    Liked by 1 person

  • @ Wily Coyote June 17, 2019 9:24 AM

    We should not be afraid of a currency devaluation. And for three reasons:

    Firstly, the inhabitants, most of whom are far too fat, lose their fat when the supermarket shelves are empty.

    Secondly, devaluation will penalise those who are responsible for most, namely lazy bureaucrats who have no access to foreign currency.

    Thirdly and finally, devaluation will raise work ethic.

    Liked by 1 person

  • Miller

    You sure that you are not posting that question to David 🙂 ?

    Personally, I don’t feel that the majority ” average man” on the street need all of that information.
    Some do but not the majority.

    All of that information should be available some place. Where to find it? I cannot help you but maybe one of the other bloggers can.

    I don’t know if government will do it while negotiations are going on OR if there will publish names of BOND HOLDERS period.

    A loan from CDB, IMF etc you may have that information available.

    BOND HOLDERS ????

    Like

  • @Miller

    Good point although the blogmaster would use kinder language.

    One cannot help but feel a good opportunity is being missed to educate Barbadians about the importance of producing, earning and the link to unaffordable conspicuous consumption behaviour.

    Like

  • William Skinner

    These are the culprits that have led us here.:
    The Democratic Labour Party
    The Barbados Labour Party
    An indolent lazy intellectual / academic class of political pimps and bold faced intellectual prostitutes
    A traditional Corporate Elite that has never put the interest of this country first.
    Until the above is corrected and eliminated we will remain here.

    What we need
    A new vision by a new political party or parties that will create a new political culture of nationhood and equal shares for all in the resources and wealth of the country
    An intellectual / academic class that will see themselves as the true guards of the state without selling their souls
    The creation of a new vibrant corporate/ business sector prepared to embrace worker ownership and participation in all business endeavors
    An educational system directly tied to these new goals and aspirations.
    Conclusion
    At this present time ,in office or opposition, inside or outside of parliament, there is no evidence that the required is present and or willing to come forward.

    Like

  • @ Miller June 17, 2019 1:33 PM

    We can easily prevent the devaluation.

    All the Prime Minister has to do is dismiss 10,000 civil servants, freeze the remaining civil servants’ salaries for another 10 years and execute a second, much harder domestic debt cut. We also need to lower the minimum wage and pensions and lower taxes for investors and companies. It would also be conceivable not to allow any locals to depart until all taxes have been paid.

    Voters did not deserve better because they elected Chris Sinckler twice in 2008 and 2013. They must be punished for this.

    Like

  • @William

    The emergence of this new class will come from where? From the same pool of indolents?

    Like

  • What a silly post! Unbelievable…

    Barbados pushing back on external creditors? It is the creditors that are pushing back on the debt defaulters.

    @Blogmaster
    You do know what a default is, right?

    You know that there are also people on the creditor side depending on the projected cash flows too, right? Pensioners, retail investors, etc right?

    Liked by 1 person

  • On 2nd reading. This post is even more garbage than I thought.

    All emotional claptrap.

    Comments like these, for example suggest that the Blogmaster has failed to grasp the gravity of the situation:
    Barbados is not the first country to trigger SD and will not be the last, let us get over it.

    Liked by 1 person

  • William Skinner

    @ David
    Perhaps from within the current under 20s group. I think they are taking a more serious interest in what’s going on than we want to believe. I honestly don’t think that our beloved country is beyond hope.
    I still hold fast to my position that we are not a failed state.

    Like

  • Tron:

    You provided the last piece of the puzzle for why the BLP are implementing unnecessary harmful policies, when mush better policies are available. You wrote at 2:25pm.

    “Voters did not deserve better because they elected Chris Sinckler twice in 2008 and 2013. They must be punished for this.”

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Dullard

    Why has a group of creditors representing 55% hired DeLisle Worrell to consult/represent?

    You understand that creditor have agreed in principle to a haircut? What is your point again?

    Like

  • @William

    The downside if what you suggest occurs is that the best experience to go by history requires a blend of youth and experience.

    Like

  • “Firstly, the inhabitants, most of whom are far too fat, lose their fat when the supermarket shelves are empty.”

    should start with the 3,000 pounds of blubber in the parliament..start trimming pork and fat..

    Like

  • SirSimpleSimonPresidentForLife

    3,000 divided by 30 equals 100

    If our MP’s are 100 pounds each I salute them all.

    Lolll!!!

    Like

  • Not all of them are blubber, ya have to eliminate the walking dead and a few others…

    the pork is theirs and their parasitic consultant’s salaries..

    … the fat is the obese..on 2 legs

    Like

  • @DAVID

    “One cannot help but feel a good opportunity is being missed to educate Barbadians about the importance of producing, earning and the link to unaffordable conspicuous consumption behaviour.”

    YOUR ABSOLUTELY CORRECT, opportunity being missed is IMMEDIATE CURRENCY DEVALATION to 20:1 for 2 years then total FLOAT. Tron has above proposed another solution to prevent devaluation to which Wily agrees is a viable alternative, however ultimately the currency needs to be devalued.

    It’s past time that Barbados ” bite the bullet”, ” drink the poison” and finally start to hopefully moving forward to financial stability. This future financially stable position will however be significantly socially lower than what Bajans presently enjoy.

    Like

  • I lost track of the conversation here.’

    Is White Oak delivering?
    Did the fact that they were “:known” restructuring experts help with the negotiations?
    Did White Oak win over the creditors?
    Are the creditors happy?
    What did they do, that no Bajan could do
    Why has a group of creditors representing 55% hired DeLisle Worrell to consult/represent? (Quote)
    Is he a Bajan? If so why would creditors hire a man who know nothing about restructuring?
    Where did he gain his experience?
    How come we have to get our information from a foreign rag?

    Like I said, I lost track ….

    Liked by 1 person

  • @Blogmeister
    Why has a group of creditors representing 55% hired DeLisle Worrell to consult/represent?
    Why don’t you enlighten the blog? Could it have something to do with using a local with expert knowledge and contacts on the ground?

    What does 55% have to do with anything? Do you think that the other 45% are happy to be losing money because no direct comments have been attributed to them (yet)?

    You understand that creditor have agreed in principle to a haircut? What is your point again?
    The point is that the Mugabe, White Hoax, The Mock Prof. and co. are taking the piss. The terms proffered by the govt are absurd.
    But don’t take the Dullard’s word, just look at the stalemate.

    Liked by 1 person

  • The point is your reaction is based on nothing. What do you know except info released by the creditors to foreign newspapers. Continue to speculate.

    Like

  • @David

    The truth is we know even less as no one has bothered to update us locally at all. All we are told is that negotiation can’t occur if we know, hence we will continue to speculate. Were it not for the foreign press we would know basically nothing in terms of how things are progressing.

    Like

  • fortyacresandamule

    @David. Are we sure that Paul Singer fund or others of his ilk are not among the external creditors? It therefore means that they can disagree with any haircut or any decsion not in their best interest and demand full payment like what happen to Argentina. Remember in Argentina case an overwhelmingly majority opted for a haircut, except the rouge figure Singer and his outfit.

    Like

  • @ forty

    Good question but to be fair Singer wanted what was owed to him in full because in his view Argentina was treating the creditors like enemies. What Singer did was state his concerns and act whereas the rest waited and got their justice over the next 10 years by nailing them with loan conditions that were painful to say the least.

    Their view was what we lost we will get back with interest going forward and that is what they did. If you check the similarities between how Argentina approached their issue and how we are approaching ours they are major similarities.

    Like

  • fortyacresandamule

    I don’t think we should have defaulted on the external debt. Why? The size of the external debt is not large enough in my opinion (less than 25% of total debt) to warrant a default. Plus because of our fixed exchange regime, their is no currency risk associated with our external debt payment.

    The payment to WO of us$24 million to restructure the internal portion of the debt is mind-blowing, when you considered that a large portion of the debt is owned by the NIS and the central bank. To infer that WO extrordinary payment might include kickbacks is not unreasonable.

    Like

  • Why are people not questioning the dlp’s actions which made the sd unavoidable?

    Like

  • fortyacresandamule

    @john. Singer was still making killing on the haircut, because he bought Argentina debt for pennies on the dollar. He ended up with with a return of over 1200% when Macri of Argentina decides to bow to his demands. Look at Argentina today, is it any better?

    Like

  • @ forty

    Yes and that’s the point they got past the 2004 issue and learnt nothing from it.

    The thing we need to bear in mind is that when all is said and done we will have to return to the same creditors for further financing and Those fellows got long memories!

    Like

  • @fortyacresandamule

    You are not buying the explanation by government that the low reserve, upcoming hurricane season and heavy upcoming loan payments was a good reason to SD?

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s