Podcasts about issuance

The process for obtaining a warrant to raid someone's home by federal law enforcement agencies generally follows these steps:Investigation: Law enforcement agencies conduct an investigation to gather evidence that suggests criminal activity is occurring at the target location.Probable Cause: Law enforcement must establish probable cause, meaning they must have sufficient evidence to believe that a crime has been committed and that evidence of the crime is likely to be found at the target location.Affidavit: A law enforcement officer presents an affidavit to a judge or magistrate. This affidavit outlines the facts and evidence supporting the request for a search warrant. It typically includes details about the suspected criminal activity, the target location, and the specific evidence or contraband believed to be present.Review by Judge: The judge or magistrate reviews the affidavit to determine if there is probable cause to issue a search warrant. The judge may ask for additional information or clarification before making a decision.Issuance of Warrant: If the judge finds sufficient probable cause, they will issue a search warrant authorizing law enforcement to conduct a raid on the target location. The warrant specifies the scope of the search, including what areas of the premises can be searched and what items can be seized.Execution of Raid: Law enforcement officers execute the raid in accordance with the terms of the warrant. They must conduct the search within the parameters set forth in the warrant and may seize any evidence or contraband found during the search that is within the scope of the warrant.Regarding the evidence needed to obtain a search warrant, it typically includes specific information that establishes probable cause, such as:Witness statementsSurveillance footagePhysical evidenceFinancial recordsInformation obtained from informantsResults of undercover operationsExpert testimonyThe evidence presented must be reliable and credible enough to persuade a judge that there is a fair probability that evidence of a crime will be found at the target location. The level of evidence required is higher than mere suspicion but lower than beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard of proof required for a criminal conviction.In this episode we take a look at the raid and what the feds were hoping to find during the execution of the warrant.   (commercial at 9:46)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Inside the raids at Sean 'Diddy' Combs' estates - Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)

The process for obtaining a warrant to raid someone's home by federal law enforcement agencies generally follows these steps:Investigation: Law enforcement agencies conduct an investigation to gather evidence that suggests criminal activity is occurring at the target location.Probable Cause: Law enforcement must establish probable cause, meaning they must have sufficient evidence to believe that a crime has been committed and that evidence of the crime is likely to be found at the target location.Affidavit: A law enforcement officer presents an affidavit to a judge or magistrate. This affidavit outlines the facts and evidence supporting the request for a search warrant. It typically includes details about the suspected criminal activity, the target location, and the specific evidence or contraband believed to be present.Review by Judge: The judge or magistrate reviews the affidavit to determine if there is probable cause to issue a search warrant. The judge may ask for additional information or clarification before making a decision.Issuance of Warrant: If the judge finds sufficient probable cause, they will issue a search warrant authorizing law enforcement to conduct a raid on the target location. The warrant specifies the scope of the search, including what areas of the premises can be searched and what items can be seized.Execution of Raid: Law enforcement officers execute the raid in accordance with the terms of the warrant. They must conduct the search within the parameters set forth in the warrant and may seize any evidence or contraband found during the search that is within the scope of the warrant.Regarding the evidence needed to obtain a search warrant, it typically includes specific information that establishes probable cause, such as:Witness statementsSurveillance footagePhysical evidenceFinancial recordsInformation obtained from informantsResults of undercover operationsExpert testimonyThe evidence presented must be reliable and credible enough to persuade a judge that there is a fair probability that evidence of a crime will be found at the target location. The level of evidence required is higher than mere suspicion but lower than beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the standard of proof required for a criminal conviction.In this episode we take a look at the raid and what the feds were hoping to find during the execution of the warrant.   (commercial at 9:46)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:Inside the raids at Sean 'Diddy' Combs' estates - Los Angeles Times (latimes.com)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

With foreign student visas at Harvard and elsewhere in the news, today's episode of Parsing Immigration Policy features Andrew Arthur, the Center for Immigration Studies fellow in law and policy, providing a crash course on the subject. He explains the foreign student admissions process, the responsibilities of schools certified to enroll foreign students, and recent policy issues. With over one million foreign students studying (and working) in America, this episode covers the national security implications of not having proper knowledge of who is being brought in and what they are doing while in the U.S.Key topics covered:Admissions OverviewThe role of the Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP)Student's Application to SEVP-certified institutions.Issuance of Form I-20 upon acceptance.Visa application at U.S. consulates.Which branch controls visa issuance?Role of Designated School Officials (DSOs)A DSO plays the role of a "deputized immigration officer."Monitoring student status via SEVIS.Reporting changes in enrollment or course of study.Conflict of interest? Balancing institutional responsibilities with immigration compliance.Optional Practical Training (OPT)Students working under the OPT program are still on student visas.Will these students lose their ability to be employed as cheap labor?Policy ChallengesWhy did the Trump administration revoke Harvard University's SEVP certification?Potential impact/lack of impact of the District Court's temporary restraining order (TRO).Impact on other schools.In today's commentary, Mark Krikorian, podcast host and executive director of the Center, highlights today's main illegal immigration challenge: visa overstays. He cites the recent Colorado attack committed by a visa overstayer as an example of the importance of action and describes some of the solutions which are in the reconciliation bill.HostMark Krikorian is the Executive Director of the Center for Immigration StudiesGuestAndrew Arthur is the Resident Fellow of Law and Policy at the Center for Immigration Studies.RelatedDHS Pulls Harvard's Student-Visa Certification Authority Controversial DHS Program Allows Foreign Students to Train in Sensitive Fields There Are 1.5 Million Foreign Students in the United States (and Over a Third Have Work Authorization) Not all illegal-alien criminals are border-jumpersIntro MontageVoices in the opening montage:Sen. Barack Obama at a 2005 press conference.Sen. John McCain in a 2010 election ad.President Lyndon Johnson, upon signing the 1965 Immigration Act.Booker T. Washington, reading in 1908 from his 1895 Atlanta Exposition speech.Laraine Newman as a "Conehead" on SNL in 1977.Hillary Clinton in a 2003 radio interview.Cesar Chavez in a 1974 interview.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi speaking to reporters in 2019.Prof. George Borjas in a 2016 C-SPAN appearance.Sen. Jeff Sessions in 2008 comments on the Senate floor.Candidate Trump in 2015 campaign speech.Charlton Heston in "Planet of the Apes".

As Artemis.bm continues to track catastrophe bond market activity through this very busy year of 2025, total settled issuance analysed by Artemis has already surpassed $15 billion, while the outstanding cat bond market has grown by 15.5% since the end of 2024. Catastrophe bond issuance is breaking all records so far in 2025, with now $15.025 billion of offerings settled across Rule 144A cat bonds and the few privately placed deals Artemis has tracked. Impressively, the level of issuance now settled in 2025 has already broken the record for first-eleven month issuance. Meaning, in every previous year the catastrophe bond market has existed, Artemis hadn't ever seen that volume of deals settle between January and the end of November. Given we are still at the end of May, with a whole month to run until the middle of 2025, it's clear the first-half cat bond issuance record is being broken by a particularly significant margin. The previous record for first-half cat bond issuance came in 2024, when just over $12.6 billion of deals were tracked by Artemis. Remember you can use all the interactive charts and visualisations over at www.artemis.bm to analyse catastrophe bond issuance, the outstanding market and view leaderboards of the top cat bond sponsors and service providers. Cat bond issuance settled in the month of May has reached a significant record high of almost $5.9 billion in 2025. Which beats the previous record for the month by approaching $2 billion. It also makes May 2025 the biggest single month of catastrophe bond issuance in the market's history, another very notable record that has been soundly broken this year. The rapid rate of catastrophe bond market activity seen in 2025 has also helped to propel the size of the market considerably higher already. Recall that 2025 has seen the highest level of cat bond maturities ever for the first-half, but the market has outpaced that with new issuance, to grow by around 15.5% since the end of 2024. Artemis' measure for the outstanding cat bond market, which does include some private deals and also may not factor in all principal reductions, or extensions of maturity, as we don't always receive that data, has now reached just over $57.12 billion. Which, as Artemis said, represents 15.5% growth in the outstanding catastrophe bond market since December 31st 2024, when the total stood at just under $49.48 billion. Artemis has seen more first-time cat bond sponsors come to market in H1 2025 than any other half-year so far, which has helped to propel this market expansion and growth. Alongside that, repeat sponsors have been issuing larger deals and growing cat bond's share of their reinsurance towers, in some cases, while other sponsors have seen an increased need for reinsurance and grown their cat bond coverage proportionally with that. The catastrophe bond market is well on-course to break the annual issuance record in 2025, as a reminder that stood at almost $17.7 billion by Artemis' numbers for 2024. Whether it is broken will depend on loss activity through the wind season, any other particularly impactful catastrophe losses, or if some kind of disruption to capital markets occurs. However, with only just under $1.6 billion of additional issuance needed to come to market, beyond what we have seen already and what is scheduled in the pipeline for June, it is now hard to think the annual record won't be broken in 2025. Stay tuned to Artemis for critical catastrophe bond market insights as the rest of 2025 progresses!

With Japan's bond markets making headlines, Joann Spadigam is joined by Paul Robson and Stuart Sparks to analyse market sentiment and discuss the broader global impact – including here in the UK. They also discuss the impact of the latest tariff re-de-escalation in the US on Europe, and look ahead to the upcoming ECB meeting in June.Remember to hit like and subscribe so you can listen to the latest episodes in this series as soon as they're available and get our views on the big themes and events moving markets and shaping the economy.This episode was recorded on 29 May 2025.For any terms used please refer to this glossary https://www.natwest.com/corporates/insights/markets/glossary.htmlPlease view our full disclaimer here: https://www.natwest.com/corporates/disclaimer.html

Radhika Das, IFN Journalist, interviews Nikolai Podguzov, Chairman of the Management Board, Eurasian Development Bank, on Islamic finance as a tool for regional growth, Sukuk issuance, the launch of an Islamic banking window, collaboration with the IsDB Institute and expanding the bank's role in global Islamic finance

This week's Espresso covers news from Credicuotas, Kiwi, Allug, and more!Outline of this episode:[00:30] – Credicuotas secures $33M in bond issuance[00:41] – Kiwi raises $10M and launches in Peru[00:52] – Allugg secures $5.3M FIDC[01:09] – VMetrix raises $3.2M seed round[01:32] – Visma acquires Argentinian HRTech Lara AI[01:47] – Rebalancing the Cap Table When a Founder Leaves the BandResources & people mentioned:Startups:  Credicuotas, Kiwi, Allugg,  VMetrix, Visma, Lara AI VCs: BIND | Financial Solutions, BIND Inversiones, Oslo DTVM, Kayyak, Nazca

Issuance for taxable muni's is up 29% compared to the same time last year Follow UsTwitter @NYLInvestmentsTwitter @MacKayMuniMgrsFacebook @NYLInvestmentsLinkedIn: New York Life InvestmentsLinkedIn: MacKay Municipal Managers Presented by New York Life Investmentswww.newyorklifeinvestments.com MacKay Municipal Managers is a team of portfolio managers at MacKay Shields. MacKay Shields is 100% owned by NYLIM Holdings, which is wholly owned by New York Life Insurance Company. “New York Life Investments” is both a service mark, and the common trade name, of certain investment advisors affiliated with New York Life Insurance Company.

Chapters00:00 Introduction to Darren Marble and Issuance03:02 Darren's Early Entrepreneurial Journey05:58 The Importance of Rejection in Sales08:53 Building Resilience as a Founder11:47 Lessons from a Cold Rejection14:57 The Role of the Founder in Capital Raising18:06 The Glamour vs. Reality of Being a Founder21:01 Sobriety as a Competitive Advantage25:03 The Breakthrough of Sobriety29:41 Going Public: A New Investment Show40:38 The Resilience of Founders44:36 Defining Success as an Entrepreneur

This latest podcast episode is a bit of an experiment, as we've utilised NotebookLM to transform one of our recent articles that analyses catastrophe bond issuance through April 25th 2025 into an audio podcast episode. Even with a few days to run of the fourth month of the year, catastrophe bond market issuance in 2025 is already on-track to set a new record for issuance through May, as the pipeline of new cat bond deals continues to build. With new catastrophe bond issuances that have completed and settled this week, the total cat bond issuance tracked in the Artemis Deal Directory has already reached almost $8.25 billion this year. But, impressively, the pipeline of new cat bonds slated for completion and settlement up to and including the month of May so far has now reached $3.82 billion. As a result, our forecast for catastrophe bond issuance across Rule 144A cat bonds and the privately placed deals we've tracked so far in 2025 has now reached $12.07 billion, with all of that issuance currently scheduled to settle by the end of the week of May 19th at this stage. Please note, dates of settlement for new catastrophe bond issues can change, so the forecasts could adjust over the coming weeks, but the main story does not change.  The catastrophe bond market remains on record-setting pace and further growth of the outstanding cat bond market is anticipated.

Thu, 24 Apr 2025 17:03:00 +0000 https://jungeanleger.podigee.io/2199-kapitalmarkt-stimme-at-daily-voice-114-365-oebfa-berichtet-vom-zweitgrossten-orderbuch-in-der-geschichte-der-republik-osterreich 6ab63c505faae4a825ef47635a9df9d1 kapitalmarkt-stimme.at daily voice 114/365: Christian Schreckeis, Head of Issuance and Portfolio Management, Investor Relations & Federal Budget bei der OeBFA (Österreichische Bundesfinanzierungsagentur) hat es gespostet: Österreich hat gestern die bisher erste syndizierte Dreifach-Aufstockung eines Eurozone-Staates durchgeführt. Heisst: Drei bestehende Bundesanleihen mit Laufzeiten 2029, 2039 und 2053 wurden mit einem Volumen von 7,0 Mrd. Euro aufgestockt und waren dabei 10,5fach überzeichnet. Es gab ein schnelles Pricing und das zweitgrößte Orderbuch in der Geschichte der Republik Österreich. https://www.oebfa.at Unser Ziel: Kapitalmarkt is coming home. Täglich zwischen 19 und 20 Uhr. kapitalmarkt-stimme.at daily voice Playlist auf spotify: http://www.kapitalmarkt-stimme.at/spotify http://www.kapitalmarkt-stimme.at Anmelden zum Österreichischen Aktientag am 13.5.: https://photaq.com/page/index/4170 Musik: Steve Kalen: https://open.spotify.com/artist/6uemLvflstP1ZerGCdJ7YU Playlist 30x30 (min.) Finanzwissen pur: http://www.audio-cd.at/30x30 Bewertungen bei Apple (oder auch Spotify) machen mir Freude: http://www.audio-cd.at/apple http://www.audio-cd.at/spotify 2199 full no

Microsoft Recall on Copilot+ PC: testing the security and privacy implications Russian organizations targeted by backdoor masquerading as secure networking software updates SSL.com Scrambles to Patch Certificate Issuance Vulnerability  Huge thanks to our sponsor, Dropzone AI Is your security team spending too much time chasing alerts instead of stopping threats? Dropzone AI modernizes your security operations by handling the routine investigations that consume your team's day. Our AI SOC Analyst works with your existing security tools, learns your environment, and delivers clear, actionable reports within minutes. Your human analysts can finally focus on the most critical threats. Organizations using our AI SOC Analyst handle significantly more alerts without growing their team. See how at RSA at booth ESE-60.

DEAR PAO: Production of supporting documents in the issuance of a search warrant | April 11, 2025Visit our website at https://www.manilatimes.netFollow us:Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebookInstagram - https://tmt.ph/instagramTwitter - https://tmt.ph/twitterDailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotionSubscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digitalSign up to our newsletters: https://tmt.ph/newslettersCheck out our Podcasts:Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotifyApple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcastsAmazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusicDeezer: https://tmt.ph/deezerStitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcherTune In: https://tmt.ph/tunein#TheManilaTimesVisit our website at https://www.manilatimes.netFollow us:Facebook - https://tmt.ph/facebookInstagram - https://tmt.ph/instagramTwitter - https://tmt.ph/twitterDailyMotion - https://tmt.ph/dailymotionSubscribe to our Digital Edition - https://tmt.ph/digitalSign up to our newsletters: https://tmt.ph/newslettersCheck out our Podcasts:Spotify - https://tmt.ph/spotifyApple Podcasts - https://tmt.ph/applepodcastsAmazon Music - https://tmt.ph/amazonmusicDeezer: https://tmt.ph/deezerStitcher: https://tmt.ph/stitcherTune In: https://tmt.ph/tunein#TheManilaTimes Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Deportation of Venezuelan Gang Members: The Supreme Court lifted a judge's order blocking the deportation of suspected Venezuelan gang members to a prison in El Salvador. The Trump administration used the Alien Enemies Act, an 18th-century law, to classify these gang members as part of a hostile government. The Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that challenges to deportation must be filed as habeas corpus petitions in the location where the individuals are detained, not as class actions in D.C. Cancellation of Teacher Training Grants: The Supreme Court upheld the cancellation of $600 million in teacher training grants, with $65 million yet to be distributed. The court ruled 5-4 that claims against federal money should be brought in the Court of Federal Claims. This decision was seen as a technical but significant victory against district judges trying to block the Trump administration's agenda. Reinstatement of Federal Employees: The Supreme Court reversed a district judge's order to reinstate 16,000 federal employees fired by the Trump administration. The court ruled 7-2 that the administration had followed proper procedures for the dismissals. This decision was another victory against district judges attempting to halt the Trump administration's actions. Issuance of Social Security Numbers: Nearly 4 million non-citizens were issued Social Security numbers during Joe Biden's presidency. These numbers allowed illegal aliens to access government programs and aid, costing American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) reported that many illegal aliens received Medicaid, driver's licenses, and some even registered to vote. Transgender Athletes in Women's Sports: A female fencer was disqualified for refusing to compete against a transgender opponent. Senator Ted Cruz launched an investigation into USA Fencing's policies, aiming to protect women and girls in sports. Please Hit Subscribe to this podcast Right Now. Also Please Subscribe to the 47 Morning Update with Ben Ferguson and the Ben Ferguson Show Podcast Wherever You get You're Podcasts. Thanks for Listening #seanhannity #hannity #marklevin #levin #charliekirk #megynkelly #tucker #tuckercarlson #glennbeck #benshapiro #shapiro #trump #sexton #bucksexton#rushlimbaugh #limbaugh #whitehouse #senate #congress #thehouse #democrats#republicans #conservative #senator #congressman #congressmen #congresswoman #capitol #president #vicepresident #POTUS #presidentoftheunitedstatesofamerica#SCOTUS #Supremecourt #DonaldTrump #PresidentDonaldTrump #DT #TedCruz #Benferguson #Verdict #justicecorrupted #UnwokeHowtoDefeatCulturalMarxisminAmericaYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@VerdictwithTedCruzSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Canon printer driver vulnerabilities enable Windows kernel exploitation. Astonishing cyber-security awareness from a household appliance manufacturer. France tries to hook 2.5 million school children with a Phishing test. Wordpress added an abuse prone feature in 2022. Guess what happened? Oracle? Is there something you'd like to tell us? Utah's governor just signed the App Store Accountability Act. Now what? AI bots hungry for new data are DDoSing FOSS projects. No Microsoft Account? No Microsoft Windows 11. Gmail claims it now offers E2EE. It kinda sorta does. Somewhat. A dreaded CVSS 10.0 was discovered in Apache Parquet. A bunch of terrific listener feedback. What's Multi-Perspective Issuance Corroboration and why must all certificate authorities now do it? Show Notes - https://www.grc.com/sn/SN-1020-Notes.pdf Hosts: Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte Download or subscribe to Security Now at https://twit.tv/shows/security-now. You can submit a question to Security Now at the GRC Feedback Page. For 16kbps versions, transcripts, and notes (including fixes), visit Steve's site: grc.com, also the home of the best disk maintenance and recovery utility ever written Spinrite 6. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: material.security threatlocker.com for Security Now canary.tools/twit - use code: TWIT joindeleteme.com/twit promo code TWIT bitwarden.com/twit

Canon printer driver vulnerabilities enable Windows kernel exploitation. Astonishing cyber-security awareness from a household appliance manufacturer. France tries to hook 2.5 million school children with a Phishing test. Wordpress added an abuse prone feature in 2022. Guess what happened? Oracle? Is there something you'd like to tell us? Utah's governor just signed the App Store Accountability Act. Now what? AI bots hungry for new data are DDoSing FOSS projects. No Microsoft Account? No Microsoft Windows 11. Gmail claims it now offers E2EE. It kinda sorta does. Somewhat. A dreaded CVSS 10.0 was discovered in Apache Parquet. A bunch of terrific listener feedback. What's Multi-Perspective Issuance Corroboration and why must all certificate authorities now do it? Show Notes - https://www.grc.com/sn/SN-1020-Notes.pdf Hosts: Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte Download or subscribe to Security Now at https://twit.tv/shows/security-now. You can submit a question to Security Now at the GRC Feedback Page. For 16kbps versions, transcripts, and notes (including fixes), visit Steve's site: grc.com, also the home of the best disk maintenance and recovery utility ever written Spinrite 6. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: material.security threatlocker.com for Security Now canary.tools/twit - use code: TWIT joindeleteme.com/twit promo code TWIT bitwarden.com/twit

Canon printer driver vulnerabilities enable Windows kernel exploitation. Astonishing cyber-security awareness from a household appliance manufacturer. France tries to hook 2.5 million school children with a Phishing test. Wordpress added an abuse prone feature in 2022. Guess what happened? Oracle? Is there something you'd like to tell us? Utah's governor just signed the App Store Accountability Act. Now what? AI bots hungry for new data are DDoSing FOSS projects. No Microsoft Account? No Microsoft Windows 11. Gmail claims it now offers E2EE. It kinda sorta does. Somewhat. A dreaded CVSS 10.0 was discovered in Apache Parquet. A bunch of terrific listener feedback. What's Multi-Perspective Issuance Corroboration and why must all certificate authorities now do it? Show Notes - https://www.grc.com/sn/SN-1020-Notes.pdf Hosts: Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte Download or subscribe to Security Now at https://twit.tv/shows/security-now. You can submit a question to Security Now at the GRC Feedback Page. For 16kbps versions, transcripts, and notes (including fixes), visit Steve's site: grc.com, also the home of the best disk maintenance and recovery utility ever written Spinrite 6. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: material.security threatlocker.com for Security Now canary.tools/twit - use code: TWIT joindeleteme.com/twit promo code TWIT bitwarden.com/twit

Canon printer driver vulnerabilities enable Windows kernel exploitation. Astonishing cyber-security awareness from a household appliance manufacturer. France tries to hook 2.5 million school children with a Phishing test. Wordpress added an abuse prone feature in 2022. Guess what happened? Oracle? Is there something you'd like to tell us? Utah's governor just signed the App Store Accountability Act. Now what? AI bots hungry for new data are DDoSing FOSS projects. No Microsoft Account? No Microsoft Windows 11. Gmail claims it now offers E2EE. It kinda sorta does. Somewhat. A dreaded CVSS 10.0 was discovered in Apache Parquet. A bunch of terrific listener feedback. What's Multi-Perspective Issuance Corroboration and why must all certificate authorities now do it? Show Notes - https://www.grc.com/sn/SN-1020-Notes.pdf Hosts: Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte Download or subscribe to Security Now at https://twit.tv/shows/security-now. You can submit a question to Security Now at the GRC Feedback Page. For 16kbps versions, transcripts, and notes (including fixes), visit Steve's site: grc.com, also the home of the best disk maintenance and recovery utility ever written Spinrite 6. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: material.security threatlocker.com for Security Now canary.tools/twit - use code: TWIT joindeleteme.com/twit promo code TWIT bitwarden.com/twit

Canon printer driver vulnerabilities enable Windows kernel exploitation. Astonishing cyber-security awareness from a household appliance manufacturer. France tries to hook 2.5 million school children with a Phishing test. Wordpress added an abuse prone feature in 2022. Guess what happened? Oracle? Is there something you'd like to tell us? Utah's governor just signed the App Store Accountability Act. Now what? AI bots hungry for new data are DDoSing FOSS projects. No Microsoft Account? No Microsoft Windows 11. Gmail claims it now offers E2EE. It kinda sorta does. Somewhat. A dreaded CVSS 10.0 was discovered in Apache Parquet. A bunch of terrific listener feedback. What's Multi-Perspective Issuance Corroboration and why must all certificate authorities now do it? Show Notes - https://www.grc.com/sn/SN-1020-Notes.pdf Hosts: Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte Download or subscribe to Security Now at https://twit.tv/shows/security-now. You can submit a question to Security Now at the GRC Feedback Page. For 16kbps versions, transcripts, and notes (including fixes), visit Steve's site: grc.com, also the home of the best disk maintenance and recovery utility ever written Spinrite 6. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: material.security threatlocker.com for Security Now canary.tools/twit - use code: TWIT joindeleteme.com/twit promo code TWIT bitwarden.com/twit

Canon printer driver vulnerabilities enable Windows kernel exploitation. Astonishing cyber-security awareness from a household appliance manufacturer. France tries to hook 2.5 million school children with a Phishing test. Wordpress added an abuse prone feature in 2022. Guess what happened? Oracle? Is there something you'd like to tell us? Utah's governor just signed the App Store Accountability Act. Now what? AI bots hungry for new data are DDoSing FOSS projects. No Microsoft Account? No Microsoft Windows 11. Gmail claims it now offers E2EE. It kinda sorta does. Somewhat. A dreaded CVSS 10.0 was discovered in Apache Parquet. A bunch of terrific listener feedback. What's Multi-Perspective Issuance Corroboration and why must all certificate authorities now do it? Show Notes - https://www.grc.com/sn/SN-1020-Notes.pdf Hosts: Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte Download or subscribe to Security Now at https://twit.tv/shows/security-now. You can submit a question to Security Now at the GRC Feedback Page. For 16kbps versions, transcripts, and notes (including fixes), visit Steve's site: grc.com, also the home of the best disk maintenance and recovery utility ever written Spinrite 6. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: material.security threatlocker.com for Security Now canary.tools/twit - use code: TWIT joindeleteme.com/twit promo code TWIT bitwarden.com/twit

Canon printer driver vulnerabilities enable Windows kernel exploitation. Astonishing cyber-security awareness from a household appliance manufacturer. France tries to hook 2.5 million school children with a Phishing test. Wordpress added an abuse prone feature in 2022. Guess what happened? Oracle? Is there something you'd like to tell us? Utah's governor just signed the App Store Accountability Act. Now what? AI bots hungry for new data are DDoSing FOSS projects. No Microsoft Account? No Microsoft Windows 11. Gmail claims it now offers E2EE. It kinda sorta does. Somewhat. A dreaded CVSS 10.0 was discovered in Apache Parquet. A bunch of terrific listener feedback. What's Multi-Perspective Issuance Corroboration and why must all certificate authorities now do it? Show Notes - https://www.grc.com/sn/SN-1020-Notes.pdf Hosts: Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte Download or subscribe to Security Now at https://twit.tv/shows/security-now. You can submit a question to Security Now at the GRC Feedback Page. For 16kbps versions, transcripts, and notes (including fixes), visit Steve's site: grc.com, also the home of the best disk maintenance and recovery utility ever written Spinrite 6. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: material.security threatlocker.com for Security Now canary.tools/twit - use code: TWIT joindeleteme.com/twit promo code TWIT bitwarden.com/twit

Canon printer driver vulnerabilities enable Windows kernel exploitation. Astonishing cyber-security awareness from a household appliance manufacturer. France tries to hook 2.5 million school children with a Phishing test. Wordpress added an abuse prone feature in 2022. Guess what happened? Oracle? Is there something you'd like to tell us? Utah's governor just signed the App Store Accountability Act. Now what? AI bots hungry for new data are DDoSing FOSS projects. No Microsoft Account? No Microsoft Windows 11. Gmail claims it now offers E2EE. It kinda sorta does. Somewhat. A dreaded CVSS 10.0 was discovered in Apache Parquet. A bunch of terrific listener feedback. What's Multi-Perspective Issuance Corroboration and why must all certificate authorities now do it? Show Notes - https://www.grc.com/sn/SN-1020-Notes.pdf Hosts: Steve Gibson and Leo Laporte Download or subscribe to Security Now at https://twit.tv/shows/security-now. You can submit a question to Security Now at the GRC Feedback Page. For 16kbps versions, transcripts, and notes (including fixes), visit Steve's site: grc.com, also the home of the best disk maintenance and recovery utility ever written Spinrite 6. Join Club TWiT for Ad-Free Podcasts! Support what you love and get ad-free shows, a members-only Discord, and behind-the-scenes access. Join today: https://twit.tv/clubtwit Sponsors: material.security threatlocker.com for Security Now canary.tools/twit - use code: TWIT joindeleteme.com/twit promo code TWIT bitwarden.com/twit

National Identification Authority (NIA) has announced that, starting Monday, 7th April 2025, it will resume the issuance of printed backlogs and first-time registration of Ghana Cards at all its District Offices in the Greater Accra Region

Rapid premium rate increases, coupled with pockets of higher reinsurance pricing, also expands the need for higher capital, said Jason Hopper, associate director, AM Best, discussing a new Best's Special Report.

In this episode, Scott sits down with Darren Marble — the creator of Going Public and founder of Issuance — for a wide-ranging conversation on the rise of retail investors, the evolution of equity crowdfunding, and why he believes the best days of this industry are still ahead. Darren shares the inside story of launching Going Public, a groundbreaking series now partnered with X (formerly Twitter), where everyday people can invest in startups while watching. He opens up about the challenges of getting mainstream media to understand the vision, the value of showmanship in a complex industry, and how they're landing major talent like Baron Davis, Floyd Mayweather, and Steve Aoki to bring visibility to private investing. Scott and Darren go deep into the early days of crowdfunding, the Elio Motors deal that kicked it all off, the philosophy behind Issuance's white-label platform, and why building a frictionless checkout for investing (complete with Apple Pay and USDC) was always the obvious play. This episode is full of gems on what it really takes to build trust, media attention, and infrastructure in a space often ignored by institutions — until now. Support the show by signing up for a free account @ Kingscrowd.com Learn more about Darren's work @ goingpublic.com, issuance.com Follow Darren: @darrenmarble Follow Scott: @kitun

In this podcast Francis Diamond, Aditya Chordia and Khagendra Gupta discuss their latest thoughts on European rate markets, focusing on Euro rates markets into the 2 April tariff announcement, thoughts on SSAs and issuance, Scandi rates following recent CB meetings and UK rates in light of this week's Spring Statement.   This podcast was recorded on March 28, 2025. This communication is provided for information purposes only. Institutional clients can view the related report at  https://www.jpmm.com/research/content/GPS-4942101-0, https://www.jpmm.com/research/content/GPS-4946392-0.pdf for more information; please visit www.jpmm.com/research/disclosures for important disclosures. © 2025 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved. This material or any portion hereof may not be reprinted, sold or redistributed without the written consent of J.P. Morgan. It is strictly prohibited to use or share without prior written consent from J.P. Morgan any research material received from J.P. Morgan or an authorized third-party (“J.P. Morgan Data”) in any third-party artificial intelligence (“AI”) systems or models when such J.P. Morgan Data is accessible by a third-party. It is permissible to use J.P. Morgan Data for internal business purposes only in an AI system or model that protects the confidentiality of J.P. Morgan Data so as to prevent any and all access to or use of such J.P. Morgan Data by any third-party.

On 4 December 2024 Future of Finance hosted a one-day event at the offices of AON in London. Entitled Digital asset custody: What do asset managers and asset owners need to know about digital asset custody and custodians?, the event attracted 160 registrants from asset managers, banks, custodian banks, digital asset custodians, exchanges, financial market infrastructures, insurers, investment consultants, law firms, regulators and technology vendors. This is an account of what they and the panellists contributed to the seven sessions that day, both live and in the multiple-choice questionnaire they completed in advance, the results of which are also published here.The panellists for this discussion were Laurent Kssis, Board Member and Strategic Advisor to Issuance.Swiss AG; Philip Rage, Director of Strategic Initiatives at Soter Insure; Tariq Rasheed, a Partner at Reed Smith; Jeet Singh, Partner and EMEA Blockchain Leader at EY; and, as moderator, Ed Pugh, Development Director, Fintech and Digital Assets, at Aon. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Issuance ticked up in the higher education sector, with various results Follow UsTwitter @NYLInvestmentsTwitter @MacKayMuniMgrsFacebook @NYLInvestmentsLinkedIn: New York Life InvestmentsLinkedIn: MacKay Municipal ManagersPresented by New York Life Investmentswww.newyorklifeinvestments.com MacKay Municipal Managers is a team of portfolio managers at MacKay Shields. MacKay Shields is 100% owned by NYLIM Holdings, which is wholly owned by New York Life Insurance Company. “New York Life Investments” is both a service mark, and the common trade name, of certain investment advisors affiliated with New York Life Insurance Company.

Welcome to The Chrisman Commentary, your go-to daily mortgage news podcast, where industry insights meet expert analysis. Hosted by Robbie Chrisman, this podcast delivers the latest updates on mortgage rates, capital markets, and the forces shaping the housing finance landscape. Whether you're a seasoned professional or just looking to stay informed, you'll get clear, concise breakdowns of market trends and economic shifts that impact the mortgage world.In today's episode, we look at Ginnie Mae MBS issuance. Plus, Robbie sits down with Floify's Sofia Rossato to discuss how to deliver an excellent customer experience in the point-of-sale space. And he closes by taking a look ahead to what's on the economic calendar this week.Today's podcast is brought to you by Floify, a leading point-of-sale platform for mortgage professionals. Known for its user-friendly interface and no-code configurability, Floify empowers small and midsize lenders and mortgage brokers with efficiency gains and cost savings. Features like native eSigning, electronic verification, and configurable loan applications reduce turn times and put money back in lenders' pockets. See the beauty of its simplicity at www.floify.com.

In this episode, Andy Constan joins the show to discuss Quantitative Tightening 2.0, why the Fed wants to change its SOMA portfolio, and the connection between QT, the debt ceiling, and TGA. We also delve into the deficit, DOGE success being anti-growth, and much more. Enjoy! — Follow Andy: https://x.com/dampedspring Follow Felix: https://twitter.com/fejau_inc Follow Forward Guidance: https://twitter.com/ForwardGuidance Follow Blockworks: https://twitter.com/Blockworks_ Forward Guidance Newsletter: https://blockworks.co/newsletter/forwardguidance Forward Guidance Telegram: https://t.me/+nSVVTQITWSdiYTIx — Forward Guidance Audience Survey: https://forward-guidance.beehiiv.com/forms/109bcbf7-0948-43b8-be8d-5390a5198125 — Join us at Digital Asset Summit 2025 March 18th - 20th. USE CODE FG10 FOR 10% OFF general admission! https://blockworks.co/event/digital-asset-summit-2025-new-york __ SKALE is the next evolution in Layer 1 blockchains with a gas-free invisible user experience, instant finality, high speed, and robust security. SKALE is built different as it allows for limitless scalability and has already saved its 46 Million users over $9 Billion in gas fees. SKALE is high-performance and cost-effective, making it ideal for compute-intensive applications like AI, gaming, and consumer-facing dApps. Learn more at skale.space and stay up to date with the gas-free invisible blockchain on X at @skalenetwork — Timestamps: (00:00) Introduction (01:08) Understanding Quantitative Tightening (QT) 2.0 (10:01) Skale Ad (10:22) Why the Fed Wants to Adjust its SOMA Portfolio (17:50) Potential Market Impacts and Future Strategies (25:17) Debate on QT Pause and Debt Ceiling Dynamics (34:51) Skale Ad (35:21) Debate on QT Pause and Debt Ceiling Dynamics (Con't) (38:35) Monetary Plumbing, Debt Ceiling Concerns, & Demand for Treasuries (44:03) Impact of Budget Deficit on Issuance & Interest Rates (52:28) Economic Projections and Policy Impacts (01:00:55) Risk Assets and Market Sentiment (01:05:44) Is There A Bond Trade? __ Disclaimer: Nothing discussed on Forward Guidance should be considered as investment advice. Please always do your own research & speak to a financial advisor before thinking about, thinking about putting your money into these crazy markets.

The degree to which lingering tariff uncertainty impacts both market and general economic outcomes remains unclear. Economies are evolving regardless, with Europe and Canada seeing some improvement, while US exceptionalism is perhaps fading. Issuance and regulatory developments have brought swap spreads - the difference between swap rates and bond yields of the same term - back into focus. Persistent bond weakening in North America is now in question.Participants:Simon Deeley (Desk Strategy), Canada Rates StrategistPeter Schaffrik (Desk Strategy), Head of UK/European Rates & Economics Blake Gwinn (Desk Strategy), Head of US Rates Strategy * Research Analyst opinions are their published views, independent of those expressed by Desk Analysts

This week on Test. Optimize. Scale. My guest is Darren Marble, a pioneering force in democratizing investment opportunities through media and technology. As the Executive Producer of Going Public®, he's revolutionizing how viewers engage with business television – creating the first show where audiences can invest in featured companies while watching in real-time. The groundbreaking series is set to launch its third season exclusively on

On 15 October 2024 Future of Finance hosted a one-day event at the offices of AON in London. Entitled Tokenisation of securities and funds is going to happen. How will you and your organisation survive it?, the event attracted 200 registrants from banks, asset managers, brokers, central banks, financial market infrastructures and FinTechs. This is an account of what they contributed to the six panels that day, as well as what they learned from the panellists and each other.This episode is a summary of Panel 5, titled "Why the benefits of tokenisation depend on the issuance of “native” rather than “asset-backed” (or "digital twin”) digital assets". The Panellists taking part were Anthony Woolley, Head of Business Development and Marketing at Ownera; Emma Lovett, Credit Lead for the Markets Distributed Ledger Technology team at J.P. Morgan; Ian Hunt, independent authority and adviser on buy-side business processes and technology; Vic Arulchandran, Director and Head of Digital Product and Market Design at Deutsche Börse| Clearstream; and Stephen McConville, Head of Structuring at Hedgehog Invest. Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Tune in to this episode of the Security Token Show where this week Herwig Konings covers the industry leading headlines and market movements, including how more private equity enters tokenization and Securitize continues to be a top choice! This week Jason Barraza had the opportunity to host Yuval Rooz from Digital Asset/ Canton Network. They talk about Etherealize, on-chain privacy and his take on zero knowledge proofs, Canton Network Developments, and a whole lot more!    Join the RWA Foundation and Read the Whitepaper: RWAF.xyz Read STM's Global Tokenized Real Estate Market Guide 2024: https://docsend.com/view/rrfjz7zxzqb9na2q  Read the December 2024 RWA Securities Market Update: https://docsend.com/view/6vf42wm8quhnttuv  Company of the Week - Herwig: Apollo   The Market Movements $ACRED by Apollo on Securitize and 6 Chains Through Wormhole: https://securitize.io/learn/press/apollo-and-securitize-announce-partnership-and-launch-tokenized-access-to-credit-fund   Superstate Announces Plans to Go Multi-Chain with $USTB, $USCC: https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7290054405406511105/   Ondo Announces Plans to Create OUSG:RLUSD Pair on XRP Ledger: https://blog.ondo.finance/ondo-finance-expands-institutional-reach-with-ousg-deployment-on-the-xrp-ledger/   Ethereum Foundation Gets Legit On Tokenization; Launches Etherealize: https://beincrypto.com/ethereum-adopts-enterprise-push-with-etherealize/   Licensed RWA Broker Texture Capital Joins Canton Network: https://www.ledgerinsights.com/texture-capital-joins-canton-network-to-provide-dlt-secondary-market/   Particula Assigns an AA Rating to the Issuance of the $USTBL Token by Spiko SICAV: https://particula.io/particula-rating-abstract-spiko-ustbl-january-2025/ ⏰ TABLE OF CONTENTS ⏰ 0:16 Introduction 0:45 STS Interviews: Digital Asset/ Canton Network 20:58 Market Movements 27:15 RWA Foundation Weekly Update 29:54 Companies of The Week: Apollo  

Luis Oganes, head of Global Macro research at J.P. Morgan, discusses the outlook for government bond issuance in 2025 with strategists Jay Barry and Aditya Chordia. The team discusses how ongoing central bank QT amplifies issuance trends, and wide budget deficits suggest term premium should remain elevated in the US and UK, while these trends should be less impactful for Euro-area and Japanese yields.   Speakers: Luis Oganes, Head of Global Macro Research Jay Barry, Head of Global Rates Strategy Aditya Chordia, European Rates Strategy     This podcast was recorded on 17 January 2025. This communication is provided for information purposes only. Institutional clients can view the related report at https://www.jpmm.com/research/content/GPS-4887257-0, for more information; please visit www.jpmm.com/research/disclosures for important disclosures. © 2025 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved. This material or any portion hereof may not be reprinted, sold or redistributed without the written consent of J.P. Morgan. It is strictly prohibited to use or share without prior written consent from J.P. Morgan any research material received from J.P. Morgan or an authorized third-party (“J.P. Morgan Data”) in any third-party artificial intelligence (“AI”) systems or models when such J.P. Morgan Data is accessible by a third-party. It is permissible to use J.P. Morgan Data for internal business purposes only in an AI system or model that protects the confidentiality of J.P. Morgan Data so as to prevent any and all access to or use of such J.P. Morgan Data by any third-party.

One of the various attack surfaces in encryption is insuring the certificates used to share the initial set of private keys are not somehow replaced by an attacker. In systems where a single server or source is used to get the initial certificates, however, it is fairly easy for an attacker to hijack the certificate distribution process. Henry Birge-Lee joins us on this episode of the Hedge to talk about extensions to existing certificate systems where a certificate is pulled from more than one source. You can find his article here.

1UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTSOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISIONIn re:INTRUM AB, et al.,1Debtors.Chapter 11Case No. 24-90575 (CML)(Jointly Administered)NOTICE OF APPEALPursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) and Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 8002 and 8003,notice is hereby given that the Ad Hoc Committee of holders of 2025 notes issued by Intrum AB(the “AHC”) hereby appeals to the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texasfrom (i) the Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262) (the “Motion to Dismiss Order”) and (ii) theOrder (I) Approving Disclosure Statement and (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor (Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263) (the“Confirmation Order”). A copy of the Motion to Dismiss Order is attached as Exhibit A and acopy of the Confirmation Order is attached as Exhibit B. Additionally, the transcript of theBankruptcy Court's oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and ConfirmationOrder (ECF No. 275) is attached as Exhibit C.Below are the names of all parties to this appeal and their respective counsel:1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors'service address in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, Ste 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 62I. APPELLANTA. Name of Appellant:The members of the AHC include:Boundary Creek Master Fund LP; CF INT Holdings Designated Activity Company; CaiusCapital Master Fund; Diameter Master Fund LP; Diameter Dislocation Master Fund II LP; FirTree Credit Opportunity Master Fund, LP; MAP 204 Segregated Portfolio, a segregated portfolioof LMA SPC; Star V Partners LLC; and TQ Master Fund LP.Attorneys for the AHC:QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLPChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comB. Positions of appellant in the adversary proceeding or bankruptcy case that isthe subject of this appeal:CreditorsCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 2 of 63II. THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPEALA. Judgment, order, or decree appealed from:The Order Denying Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule ofBankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (ECF No. 262); the Order (I) Approving Disclosure Statementand (II) Confirming Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB and Its Affiliated Debtor(Further Technical Modifications) (ECF No. 263); and the December 31, 2024 Transcript of OralRuling Before the Honorable Christopher M. Lopez United States Bankruptcy Court Judge (ECFNo. 275).B. The date on which the judgment, order, or decree was entered:The Motion to Dismiss Order and the Confirmation Order were entered on December 31,2024. The Court issued its oral ruling accompanying the Motion to Dismiss Order and theConfirmation Order on December 31, 2024.III. OTHER PARTIES TO THIS APPEALIntrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLCMILBANK LLPDennis F. Dunne (admitted pro hac vice)Jaimie Fedell (admitted pro hac vice)55 Hudson YardsNew York, NY 10001Telephone: (212) 530-5000Facsimile: (212) 530-5219Email: ddunne@milbank.comjfedell@milbank.com–and–Andrew M. Leblanc (admitted pro hac vice)Melanie Westover Yanez (admitted pro hac vice)1850 K Street, NW, Suite 1100Washington, DC 20006Telephone: (202) 835-7500Facsimile: (202) 263-7586Email: aleblanc@milbank.commwyanez@milbank.com–and–PORTER HEDGES LLPJohn F. Higgins (SBN 09597500)Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 3 of 64Eric D. Wade (SBN 00794802)M. Shane Johnson (SBN 24083263)1000 Main Street, 36th FloorHouston TX 77002Telephone: (713) 226-6000Facsimile: (713) 226-6248Email: jhiggins@porterhedges.comewade@porterhedges.comsjohnson@porterhedges.comIV. OTHER PARTIES THAT MAY HAVE AN INTEREST IN THIS APPEALThe following chart lists certain parties that are not parties to this appeal, but that may havean interest in the outcome of the case. These parties should be served with notice of this appealby the Debtors who are aware of their identities and best positioned to provide notice.All Other Creditors of the Debtors, Including, But Not Limited To:• Certain funds and accounts managed by BlackRock Investment Management (UK)Limited or its affiliates;• Capital Four;• Davidson Kempner European Partners, LLP;• Intermediate Capital Managers Limited;• Mandatum Asset Management Ltd;• H.I.G. Capital, LLC;• Spiltan Hograntefond; Spiltan Rantefond Sverige; and Spiltan Aktiefond Stabil;• The RCF SteerCo Group;• Swedbank AB (publ).Any Holder of Stock of the Debtors• Any holder of stock of the Debtors, including their successors and assigns.Case 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 4 of 65Respectfully submitted this 13th day of January, 2025.QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &SULLIVAN, LLP/s/ Christopher D. PorterChristopher D. Porter (SBN 24070437)Joanna D. Caytas (SBN 24127230)Melanie A. Guzman (SBN 24117175)Cameron M. Kelly (SBN 24120936)700 Louisiana Street, Suite 3900Houston, TX 77002Telephone: (713) 221-7000Facsimile: (713) 221-7100Email: chrisporter@quinnemanuel.comjoannacaytas@quinnemanuel.commelanieguzman@quinnemanuel.comcameronkelly@quinnemanuel.com-and-Benjamin I. Finestone (admitted pro hac vice)Sascha N. Rand (admitted pro hac vice)Katherine A. Scherling (admitted pro hac vice)295 5th AvenueNew York, New York 10016Telephone: (212) 849-7000Facsimile: (212) 849-7100Email: benjaminfinestone@quinnemanuel.comsascharand@quinnemanuel.comkatescherling@quinnemanuel.comCOUNSEL FOR THE AD HOC COMMITTEE OFINTRUM AB 2025 NOTEHOLDERSCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 5 of 6CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEI, Christopher D. Porter, hereby certify that on the 13th day of January, 2025, a copy ofthe foregoing document has been served via the Electronic Case Filing System for the UnitedStates Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas./s/ Christopher D. PorterBy: Christopher D. PorterCase 24-90575 Document 296 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 6 of 6EXHIBIT ACase 24-90575 Document 296-1 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 31IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB, et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))Jointly AdministeredDebtors. ))ORDER DENYING MOTION OF THE AD HOCCOMMITTEE OF HOLDERS OF INTRUM AB NOTES DUE 2025TO DISMISS CHAPTER 11 CASES PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 1112(B) ANDFEDERAL RULE OF BANKRUPTCY PROCEDURE 1017(F)(1)(Related to Docket No. 27)This matter, having come before the Court upon the Motion of the Ad Hoc Committee ofHolders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. §1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) [Docket No. 27] (the “Motion toDismiss”); and this Court having considered the Debtors' Objection to the Motion of the Ad HocCommittee of Holders of Intrum AB Notes Due 2025 to Dismiss Chapter 11 Cases Pursuant to 11U.S.C. § 1112(b) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 1017(f)(1) (the “Objection”) andany other responses or objections to the Motion to Dismiss; and this Court having jurisdiction overthis matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334 and the Amended Standing Order; and this Court havingfound that this is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2); and this Court having foundthat it may enter a final order consistent with Article III of the United States Constitution; and thisCourt having found that the relief requested in the Objection is in the best interests of the Debtors'1 The Debtors in these Chapter 11 Cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these Chapter 11 Cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2101, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f2 32estates; and this Court having found that the Debtors' notice of the Objection and opportunity fora hearing on the Motion to Dismiss and Objection were appropriate and no other notice need beprovided; and this Court having reviewed the Motion to Dismiss and Objection and havingheard the statements in support of the relief requested therein at a hearing before this Court; andthis Court having determined that the legal and factual bases set forth in the Objectionestablish just cause for the relief granted herein; and upon all of the proceedings had beforethis Court; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is HEREBYORDERED THAT:1. The Motion to Dismiss is Denied for the reasons stated at the December 31, 2024 hearing.2. This Court retains exclusive jurisdiction and exclusive venue with respect to allmatters arising from or related to the implementation, interpretation, and enforcement of this Order.DAeucegmubste 0r 23,1 2, 0210294CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29662-1 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f2 3EXHIBIT BCase 24-90575 Document 296-2 Filed in TXSB on 01/13/25 Page 1 of 135IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURTFOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXASHOUSTON DIVISION)In re: ) Chapter 11)Intrum AB et al.,1 ) Case No. 24-90575 (CML)))(Jointly Administered)Debtors. ))ORDER (I) APPROVINGDISCLOSURE STATEMENT AND(II) CONFIRMING JOINT PREPACKAGED CHAPTER 11PLAN OF INTRUM AB AND ITS AFFILIATEDDEBTOR (FURTHER TECHNICAL MODIFICATIONS)The above-captioned debtors and debtors in possession (collectively, the“Debtors”), having:a. entered into that certain Lock-Up Agreement, dated as of July 10, 2024 (asamended and restated on August 15, 2024, and as further modified,supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time in accordance with itsterms, the “the Lock-Up Agreement”) and that certain Backstop Agreement,dated as of July 10, 2024, (as amended and restated on November 15, 2024 andas further modified, supplemented, or otherwise amended from time to time inaccordance with its terms), setting out the terms of the backstop commitmentsprovided by the Backstop Providers to backstop the entirety of the issuance ofNew Money Notes (as may be further amended, restated, amended and restated,modified or supplemented from time to time in accordance with the termsthereof, the “Backstop Agreement”) which set forth the terms of a consensualfinancial restructuring of the Debtors;b. commenced, on October 17, 2024, a prepetition solicitation (the “Solicitation”)of votes on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of IntrumAB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (asthe same may be further amended, modified and supplemented from time totime, the “Plan”), by causing the transmittal, through their solicitation andballoting agent, Kroll Restructuring Administration LLC (“Kroll”), to theholders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of, among other things: (i) the1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Intrum AB and Intrum AB of Texas LLC. The Debtors' serviceaddress in these chapter 11 cases is 801 Travis Street, STE 2102, #1312, Houston, TX 77002.United States Bankruptcy CourtSouthern District of TexasENTEREDDecember 31, 2024Nathan Ochsner, ClerkCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 2 o of f1 133452Plan, (ii) the Disclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate (as the same may befurther amended, modified and supplemented from time to time, the“Disclosure Statement”), and (iii) the Ballots and Master Ballot to vote on thePlan (the “Ballots”), (iv) the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7];c. commenced on November 15, 2024 (the “Petition Date”), these chapter 11 cases(these “Chapter 11 Cases”) by filing voluntary petitions in the United StatesBankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas (the “Bankruptcy Court”or the “Court”) for relief under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code(the “Bankruptcy Code”);d. Filed on November 15, 2024, the Affidavit of Service of Solicitation Materials[Docket No. 7] (the “Solicitation Affidavit”);e. Filed, on November 16, 2024 the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 16] and theDisclosure Statement for Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Intrum AB andits Debtor Affiliate [Docket No. 17];f. Filed on November 16, 2024, the Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of ofthe Debtors' Chapter 11 Petitions and First Day Motions [Docket No. 14] (the“First Day Declaration”);g. Filed on November 17, 2024, the Declaration of Alex Orchowski of KrollRestructuring Administration LLC Regarding the Solicitation of Votes andTabulation of Ballots Case on the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code [Docket No. 18] (the “Voting Declaration,” andtogether with the Plan, the Disclosure Statement, the Ballots, and theSolicitation Affidavit, the “Solicitation Materials”);h. obtained, on November 19, 2024, the Order(I) Scheduling a Combined Hearingon (A) Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and (B) Confirmation of the Plan,(II) Approving Solicitation Procedures and Form and Manner of Notice ofCommencement, Combined Hearing, and Objection Deadline, (III) FixingDeadline to Object to Disclosure Statement and Plan, (IV) Conditionally (A)Directing the United States Trustee Not to Convene Section 341 Meeting ofCreditors and (B) Waiving Requirement to File Statements of Financial Affairsand Schedules of Assets and Liabilities, and (V) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 71] (the “Scheduling Order”), which, among other things: (i)approved the prepetition solicitation and voting procedures, including theConfirmation Schedule (as defined therein); (ii) conditionally approved theDisclosure Statement and its use in the Solicitation; and (iii) scheduled theCombined Hearing on December 16, 2024, at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing CentralCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 3 o of f1 133453Time) to consider the final approval of the Disclosure Statement and theconfirmation of the Plan (the “Combined Hearing”);i. served, through Kroll, on November 20, 2025, on all known holders of Claimsand Interests, the U.S. Trustee and certain other parties in interest, the Noticeof: (I) Commencement of Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Cases; (II) Hearing on theDisclosure Statement and Confirmation of the Plan, and (III) Certain ObjectionDeadlines (the “Combined Hearing Notice”) as evidence by the Affidavit ofService [Docket No. 160];j. caused, on November 25 and 27, 2024, the Combined Hearing Notice to bepublished in the New York Times (national and international editions) and theFinancial Times (international edition), as evidenced by the Certificate ofPublication [Docket No. 148];k. Filed and served, on December 10, 2024, the Plan Supplement for the Debtors'Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization [Docket 165];l. Filed on December 10, 2024, the Declaration of Jeffrey Kopa in Support ofConfirmation of the Joint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum ABand its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code [DocketNo. 155];m. Filed on December 14, 2024, the:i. Debtors' Memorandum of Law in Support of an Order: (I) Approving, on aFinal Basis, Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement; (II) Confirming theJoint Prepackaged Plan of Reorganization; and (III) Granting Related Relief[Docket No. 190] (the “Confirmation Brief”);ii. Declaration of Andrés Rubio in Support of Confirmation of the JointPrepackaged Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate.[Docket No. 189] (the “Confirmation Declaration”); andiii. Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan of Reorganization of Intrum AB and itsDebtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code (FurtherTechnical Modifications) [Docket No. 191];n. Filed on December 18, 2024, the Joint Prepackaged Chapter 11 Plan ofReorganization of Intrum AB and its Debtor Affiliate Pursuant to Chapter 11of the Bankruptcy Code (Further Technical Modifications) [Docket No. 223];CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 3 4 o of f1 133454WHEREAS, the Court having, among other things:a. set December 12, 2024, at 4:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) as the deadlinefor Filing objection to the adequacy of the Disclosure Statement and/orConfirmation2 of the Plan (the “Objection Deadline”);b. held, on December 16, 2024 at 1:00 p.m. (prevailing Central Time) [andcontinuing through December 17, 2024], the Combined Hearing;c. heard the statements, arguments, and any objections made at the CombinedHearing;d. reviewed the Disclosure Statement, the Plan, the Ballots, the Plan Supplement,the Confirmation Brief, the Confirmation Declaration, the SolicitationAffidavit, and the Voting Declaration;e. overruled (i) any and all objections to approval of the Disclosure Statement, thePlan, and Confirmation, except as otherwise stated or indicated on the record,and (ii) all statements and reservations of rights not consensually resolved orwithdrawn, unless otherwise indicated; andf. reviewed and taken judicial notice of all the papers and pleadings Filed(including any objections, statement, joinders, reservations of rights and otherresponses), all orders entered, and all evidence proffered or adduced and allarguments made at the hearings held before the Court during the pendency ofthese cases;NOW, THEREFORE, it appearing to the Bankruptcy Court that notice of theCombined Hearing and the opportunity for any party in interest to object to the DisclosureStatement and the Plan having been adequate and appropriate as to all parties affected or to beaffected by the Plan and the transactions contemplated thereby, and the legal and factual bases setforth in the documents Filed in support of approval of the Disclosure Statement and Confirmationand other evidence presented at the Combined Hearing establish just cause for the relief grantedherein; and after due deliberation thereon and good cause appearing therefor, the BankruptcyCourt makes and issues the following findings of fact and conclusions of law, and orders for thereasons stated on the record at the December 31, 2024 ruling on plan confirmation;2 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein have meanings given to them in the Plan and/or theDisclosure Statement. The rules of interpretation set forth in Article I.B of the Plan apply to this CombinedOrder.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 4 5 o of f1 133455I. FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAWIT IS HEREBY FOUND AND DETERMINED THAT:A. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.1. The findings and conclusions set forth herein and in the record of theCombined Hearing constitute the Bankruptcy Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law underRule 52 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as made applicable herein by Bankruptcy Rules7052 and 9014. To the extent any of the following conclusions of law constitute findings of fact,or vice versa, they are adopted as such.B. Jurisdiction, Venue, Core Proceeding.2. This Court has jurisdiction over these Chapter 11 Cases pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334. Venue of these proceedings and the Chapter 11 Cases in this district is properpursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C.§ 157(b)(2) and this Court may enter a final order hereon under Article III of the United StatesConstitution.C. Eligibility for Relief.3. The Debtors were and continue to be entities eligible for relief under section109 of the Bankruptcy Code and the Debtors were and continue to be proper proponents of thePlan under section 1121(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.D. Commencement and Joint Administration of the Chapter 11 Cases.4. On the Petition Date, the Debtors commenced the Chapter 11 Cases. OnNovember 18, 2024, the Court entered an order [Docket No. 51] authorizing the jointadministration of the Chapter 11 Case in accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 1015(b). The Debtorshave operated their businesses and managed their properties as debtors in possession pursuant toCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 5 6 o of f1 133456sections 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. No trustee, examiner, or statutory committeehas been appointed in these Chapter 11 Cases.E. Adequacy of the Disclosure Statement.5. The Disclosure Statement and the exhibits contained therein (i) containssufficient information of a kind necessary to satisfy the disclosure requirements of applicablenonbankruptcy laws, rules and regulations, including the Securities Act; and (ii) contains“adequate information” as such term is defined in section 1125(a)(1) and used in section1126(b)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code, with respect to the Debtors, the Plan and the transactionscontemplated therein. The Filing of the Disclosure Statement satisfied Bankruptcy Rule 3016(b).The injunction, release, and exculpation provisions in the Plan and the Disclosure Statementdescribe, in bold font and with specific and conspicuous language, all acts to be enjoined andidentify the Entities that will be subject to the injunction, thereby satisfying Bankruptcy Rule3016(c).F. Solicitation.6. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, the Solicitationand the transmittal and service of the Solicitation Materials were: (i) timely, adequate, appropriate,and sufficient under the circumstances; and (ii) in compliance with sections 1125(g) and 1126(b)of the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Rules 3017 and 3018, the applicable Local Bankruptcy Rules,the Scheduling Order and all applicable nonbankruptcy rules, laws, and regulations applicable tothe Solicitation, including the registration requirements under the Securities Act. The SolicitationMaterials, including the Ballots and the Opt Out Form (as defined below), adequately informedthe holders of Claims entitled to vote on the Plan of the procedures and deadline for completingand submitting the Ballots.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 6 7 o of f1 1334577. The Debtors served the Combined Hearing Notice on the entire creditormatrix and served the Opt Out Form on all Non-Voting Classes. The Combined Hearing Noticeadequately informed Holders of Claims or Interests of critical information regarding voting on (ifapplicable) and objecting to the Plan, including deadlines and the inclusion of release, exculpation,and injunction provisions in the Plan, and adequately summarized the terms of the Third-PartyRelease. Further, because the form enabling stakeholders to opt out of the Third-Party Release (the“Opt Out Form”) was included in both the Ballots and the Opt Out Form, every known stakeholder,including unimpaired creditors was provided with the means by which the stakeholders could optout of the Third-Party Release. No further notice is required. The period for voting on the Planprovided a reasonable and sufficient period of time and the manner of such solicitation was anappropriate process allowing for such holders to make an informed decision.G. Tabulation.8. As described in and evidenced by the Voting Declaration, (i) the holders ofClaims in Class 3 (RCF Claims) and Class 5 (Notes Claims) are Impaired under the Plan(collectively, the “Voting Classes”) and have voted to accept the Plan in the numbers and amountsrequired by section 1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and (ii) no Class that was entitled to vote on thePlan voted to reject the Plan. All procedures used to tabulate the votes on the Plan were in goodfaith, fair, reasonable, and conducted in accordance with the applicable provisions of theBankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Rules, the Local Rules, the Disclosure Statement, theScheduling Order, and all other applicable nonbankruptcy laws, rules, and regulations.H. Plan Supplement.9. On December 10, 2024, the Debtors Filed the Plan Supplement with theCourt. The Plan Supplement (including as subsequently modified, supplemented, or otherwiseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 7 8 o of f1 133458amended pursuant to a filing with the Court), complies with the terms of the Plan, and the Debtorsprovided good and proper notice of the filing in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code, theBankruptcy Rules, the Scheduling Order, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases.All documents included in the Plan Supplement are integral to, part of, and incorporated byreference into the Plan. No other or further notice is or will be required with respect to the PlanSupplement. Subject to the terms of the Plan and the Lock-Up Agreement, and only consistenttherewith, the Debtors reserve the right to alter, amend, update, or modify the Plan Supplementand any of the documents contained therein or related thereto, in accordance with the Plan, on orbefore the Effective Date.I. Modifications to the Plan.10. Pursuant to section 1127 of the Bankruptcy Code, the modifications to thePlan described or set forth in this Combined Order constitute technical or clarifying changes,changes with respect to particular Claims by agreement with holders of such Claims, ormodifications that do not otherwise materially and adversely affect or change the treatment of anyother Claim or Interest under the Plan. These modifications are consistent with the disclosurespreviously made pursuant to the Disclosure Statement and Solicitation Materials, and notice ofthese modifications was adequate and appropriate under the facts and circumstances of the Chapter11 Cases. In accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 3019, these modifications do not require additionaldisclosure under section 1125 of the Bankruptcy Code or the resolicitation of votes under section1126 of the Bankruptcy Code, and they do not require that holders of Claims or Interests beafforded an opportunity to change previously cast acceptances or rejections of the Plan.Accordingly, the Plan is properly before this Court and all votes cast with respect to the Plan priorto such modification shall be binding and shall apply with respect to the Plan.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Filieledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 8 9 o of f1 133459J. Objections Overruled.11. Any resolution or disposition of objections to Confirmation explained orotherwise ruled upon by the Court on the record at the Confirmation Hearing is herebyincorporated by reference. All unresolved objections, statements, joinders, informal objections,and reservations of rights are hereby overruled on the merits.K. Burden of Proof.12. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have met their burden of provingthe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code by a preponderance of theevidence, the applicable evidentiary standard for Confirmation. Further, the Debtors have proventhe elements of sections 1129(a) and 1129(b) by clear and convincing evidence. Each witness whotestified on behalf of the Debtors in connection with the Confirmation Hearing was credible,reliable, and qualified to testify as to the topics addressed in his testimony.L. Compliance with the Requirements of Section 1129 of the BankruptcyCode.13. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of section 1129 of theBankruptcy Code as follows:a. Section 1129(a)(1) – Compliance of the Plan with Applicable Provisions of theBankruptcy Code.14. The Plan complies with all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122 and 1123, as required by section 1129(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.i. Section 1122 and 1123(a)(1) – Proper Classification.15. The classification of Claims and Interests under the Plan is proper under theBankruptcy Code. In accordance with sections 1122(a) and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code,Article III of the Plan provides for the separate classification of Claims and Interests at each Debtorinto Classes, based on differences in the legal nature or priority of such Claims and Interests (otherCaCsaes e2 42-49-09507557 5 D oDcoucmumenetn 2t 9266-32 FFiilleedd iinn TTXXSSBB oonn 1021//3113//2245 PPaaggee 91 0o fo 1f 3143510than Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, and Priority Tax Claims, which areaddressed in Article II of the Plan and Unimpaired, and are not required to be designated asseparate Classes in accordance with section 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code). Valid business,factual, and legal reasons exist for the separate classification of the various Classes of Claims andInterests created under the Plan, the classifications were not implemented for any improperpurpose, and the creation of such Classes does not unfairly discriminate between or among holdersof Claims or Interests.16. In accordance with section 1122(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, each Class ofClaims or Interests contains only Claims or Interests substantially similar to the other Claims orInterests within that Class. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of sections 1122(a),1122(b), and 1123(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Codeii. Section 1123(a)(2) – Specifications of Unimpaired Classes.17. Article III of the Plan specifies that Claims and Interests in the classesdeemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan. Holders of Intercompany Claims andIntercompany Interests are either Unimpaired and conclusively presumed to have accepted thePlan, or are Impaired and deemed to reject (the “Deemed Rejecting Classes”) the Plan, and, ineither event, are not entitled to vote to accept or reject the Plan. In addition, Article II of the Planspecifies that Administrative Claims and Priority Tax Claims are Unimpaired, although the Plandoes not classify these Claims. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 101 o of f1 1334511iii. Section 1123(a)(3) – Specification of Treatment of Voting Classes18. Article III.B of the Plan specifies the treatment of each Voting Class underthe Plan – namely, Class 3 and Class 5. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1123(a)(3) of the Bankruptcy Code.iv. Section 1123(a)(4) – No Discrimination.19. Article III of the Plan provides the same treatment to each Claim or Interestin any particular Class, as the case may be, unless the holder of a particular Claim or Interest hasagreed to a less favorable treatment with respect to such Claim or Interest. Accordingly, the Plansatisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(4) of the Bankruptcy Code.v. Section 1123(a)(5) – Adequate Means for Plan Implementation.20. The Plan and the various documents included in the Plan Supplementprovide adequate and proper means for the Plan's execution and implementation, including: (a)the general settlement of Claims and Interests; (b) the restructuring of the Debtors' balance sheetand other financial transactions provided for by the Plan; (c) the consummation of the transactionscontemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement, the Restructuring Implementation Deed andthe Agreed Steps Plan and other documents Filed as part of the Plan Supplement; (d) the issuanceof Exchange Notes, the New Money Notes, and the Noteholder Ordinary Shares pursuant to thePlan; (e) the amendment of the Intercreditor Agreement; (f) the amendment of the FacilityAgreement; (g) the amendment of the Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement; (h) theconsummation of the Rights Offering in accordance with the Plan, Rights Offering Documentsand the Lock-Up Agreement; (i) the granting of all Liens and security interests granted orconfirmed (as applicable) pursuant to, or in connection with, the Facility Agreement, the ExchangeNotes Indenture, the New Money Notes Indenture, the amended Intercreditor Agreement and theCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 112 o of f1 1334512Senior Secured Term Loan Agreement pursuant to the New Security Documents (including anyLiens and security interests granted or confirmed (as applicable) on the Reorganized Debtors'assets); (j) the vesting of the assets of the Debtors' Estates in the Reorganized Debtors; (k) theconsummation of the corporate reorganization contemplated by the Plan, the Lock-Up Agreement,the Agreed Steps Plan and the Master Reorganization Agreement (as defined in the RestructuringImplementation Deed); and (l) the execution, delivery, filing, or recording of all contracts,instruments, releases, and other agreements or documents in furtherance of the Plan. Accordingly,the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Codevi. Section 1123(a)(6) – Non-Voting Equity Securities.21. The Company's organizational documents in accordance with the SwedishCompanies Act, Ch. 4, Sec 5 and the Plan prohibit the issuance of non-voting securities as of theEffective Date to the extent required to comply with section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section 1123(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code.vii. Section 1123(a)(7) – Directors, Officers, and Trustees.22. The manner of selection of any officer, director, or trustee (or any successorto and such officer, director, or trustee) of the Reorganized Debtors will be determined inaccordance with the existing organizational documents, which is consistent with the interests ofcreditors and equity holders and with public policy. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies therequirements of section 1123(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code.b. Section 1123(b) – Discretionary Contents of the Plan23. The Plan contains various provisions that may be construed as discretionarybut not necessary for Confirmation under the Bankruptcy Code. Any such discretionary provisionCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 123 o of f1 1334513complies with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and is not inconsistent with the applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan satisfies section 1123(b).i. Section 1123(b)(1) – Impairment/Unimpairment of Any Class of Claims orInterests24. Article III of the Plan impairs or leaves unimpaired, as the case may be,each Class of Claims or Interests, as contemplated by section 1123(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.ii. Section 1123(b)(2) – Assumption and Rejection of Executory Contracts andUnexpired Leases25. Article V of the Plan provides for the assumption of the Debtors' ExecutoryContracts and Unexpired Leases as of the Effective Date unless such Executory Contract orUnexpired Lease: (a) is identified on the Rejected Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease List;(b) has been previously rejected by a Final Order; (c) is the subject of a motion to reject ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases that is pending on the Confirmation Date; or (4) is subject to amotion to reject an Executory Contract or Unexpired Lease pursuant to which the requestedeffective date of such rejection is after the Effective Date. Thus, the Plan satisfies section1123(b)(2).iii. Compromise and Settlement26. In accordance with section 1123(b)(3)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code andBankruptcy Rule 9019, and in consideration for the distributions and other benefits provided underthe Plan, the provisions of the Plan constitute a good-faith compromise of all Claims, Interests,and controversies relating to the contractual, legal, and subordination rights that all holders ofClaims or Interests may have with respect to any Allowed Claim or Interest or any distribution tobe made on account of such Allowed Claim or Interest. Such compromise and settlement is theproduct of extensive arm's-length, good faith negotiations that, in addition to the Plan, resulted inCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 134 o of f1 1334514the execution of the Lock-Up Agreement, which represents a fair and reasonable compromise ofall Claims, Interests, and controversies and entry into which represented a sound exercise of theDebtors' business judgment. Such compromise and settlement is fair, equitable, and reasonableand in the best interests of the Debtors and their Estates.27. The releases of the Debtors' directors and officers are an integral componentof the settlements and compromises embodied in the Plan. The Debtors' directors and officers: (a)made a substantial and valuable contribution to the Debtors' restructuring, including extensive preandpost-Petition Date negotiations with stakeholder groups, and ensured the uninterruptedoperation of the Debtors' businesses during the Chapter 11 Cases; (b) invested significant timeand effort to make the restructuring a success and maximize the value of the Debtors' businessesin a challenging operating environment; (c) attended and, in certain instances, testified atdepositions and Court hearings; (d) attended and participated in numerous stakeholder meetings,management meetings, and board meetings related to the restructuring; (e) are entitled toindemnification from the Debtors under applicable non-bankruptcy law, organizationaldocuments, and agreements; (f) invested significant time and effort in the preparation of the Lock-Up Agreement, the Plan, Disclosure Statement, all supporting analyses, and the numerous otherpleadings Filed in the Chapter 11 Cases, thereby ensuring the smooth administration of the Chapter11 Cases; and (g) are entitled to all other benefits under any employment contracts existing as ofthe Petition Date. Litigation by the Debtors or other Releasing Parties against the Debtors'directors and officers would be a distraction to the Debtors' business and restructuring and woulddecrease rather than increase the value of the estates. The releases of the Debtors' directors andofficers contained in the Plan have the consent of the Debtors and the Releasing Parties and are inthe best interests of the estates.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 145 o of f1 1334515iv. Debtor Release28. The releases of claims and Causes of Action by the Debtors, ReorganizedDebtors, and their Estates described in Article VIII.C of the Plan in accordance with section1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code (the “Debtor Release”) represent a valid exercise of the Debtors'business judgment under Bankruptcy Rule 9019. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuitof any such claims against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates' variousconstituencies because the costs involved would outweigh any potential benefit from pursuingsuch claims. The Debtor Release is fair and equitable and complies with the absolute priority rule.29. The Debtor Release is (a) an integral part of the Plan, and a component ofthe comprehensive settlement implemented under the Plan; (b) in exchange for the good andvaluable consideration provided by the Released Parties; (c) a good faith settlement andcompromise of the claims and Causes of Action released by the Debtor Release; (d) materiallybeneficial to, and in the best interests of, the Debtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and isimportant to the overall objectives of the Plan to finally resolve certain Claims among or againstcertain parties in interest in the Chapter 11 Cases; (e) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (f) given andmade after due notice and opportunity for hearing; and (g) a bar to any Debtor asserting any claimor Cause of Action released by the Debtor Release against any of the Released Parties. Theprobability of success in litigation with respect to the released claims and Causes of Action, whenweighed against the costs, supports the Debtor Release. With respect to each of these potentialCauses of Action, the parties could assert colorable defenses and the probability of success isuncertain. The Debtors' or the Reorganized Debtors' pursuit of any such claims or Causes ofAction against the Released Parties is not in the best interests of the Estates or the Debtors' variousCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 156 o of f1 1334516constituencies because the costs involved would likely outweigh any potential benefit frompursuing such claims or Causes of Action30. Holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote have overwhelmingly votedin favor of the Plan, including the Debtor Release. The Plan, including the Debtor Release, wasnegotiated before and after the Petition Date by sophisticated parties represented by able counseland advisors, including the Consenting Creditors. The Debtor Release is therefore the result of ahard fought and arm's-length negotiation process conducted in good faith.31. The Debtor Release appropriately offers protection to parties thatparticipated in the Debtors' restructuring process, including the Consenting Creditors, whoseparticipation in the Chapter 11 Cases is critical to the Debtors' successful emergence frombankruptcy. Specifically, the Released Parties, including the Consenting Creditors, madesignificant concessions and contributions to the Chapter 11 Cases, including, entering into theLock-Up Agreement and related agreements, supporting the Plan and the Chapter 11 Cases, andwaiving or agreeing to impair substantial rights and Claims against the Debtors under the Plan (aspart of the compromises composing the settlement underlying the revised Plan) in order tofacilitate a consensual reorganization and the Debtors' emergence from chapter 11. The DebtorRelease for the Debtors' directors and officers is appropriate because the Debtors' directors andofficers share an identity of interest with the Debtors and, as previously stated, supported and madesubstantial contributions to the success of the Plan, the Chapter 11 Cases, and operation of theDebtors' business during the Chapter 11 Cases, actively participated in meetings, negotiations, andimplementation during the Chapter 11 Cases, and have provided other valuable consideration tothe Debtors to facilitate the Debtors' successful reorganization and continued operation.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 167 o of f1 133451732. The scope of the Debtor Release is appropriately tailored under the factsand circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases. In light of, among other things, the value provided bythe Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and the critical nature of the Debtor Release to thePlan, the Debtor Release is appropriate.v. Release by Holders of Claims and Interests33. The release by the Releasing Parties (the “Third-Party Release”), set forthin Article VIII.D of the Plan, is an essential provision of the Plan. The Third-Party Release is: (a)consensual as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object or properly optout from the Third-Party Release; (b) within the jurisdiction of the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to28 U.S.C. § 1334; (c) in exchange for the good and valuable consideration provided by theReleased Parties; (d) a good faith settlement and compromise of the claims and Causes of Actionreleased by the Third-Party Release; (e) materially beneficial to, and in the best interests of, theDebtors, their Estates, and their stakeholders, and is important to the overall objectives of the Planto finally resolve certain Claims among or against certain parties in interest in the Chapter 11Cases; (f) fair, equitable, and reasonable; (g) given and made after due notice and opportunity forhearing; (h) appropriately narrow in scope given that it expressly excludes, among other things,any Cause of Action that is judicially determined by a Final Order to have constituted actual fraud,willful misconduct, or gross negligence; (i) a bar to any of the Releasing Parties asserting anyclaim or Cause of Action released by the Third-Party Release against any of the Released Parties;and (j) consistent with sections 105, 524, 1123, 1129, and 1141 and other applicable provisions ofthe Bankruptcy Code.34. The Third-Party Release is an integral part of the agreement embodied inthe Plan among the relevant parties in interest. Like the Debtor Release, the Third-Party ReleaseCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 178 o of f1 1334518facilitated participation in both the Debtors' Plan and the chapter 11 process generally. The Third-Party Release is instrumental to the Plan and was critical in incentivizing parties to support thePlan and preventing significant and time-consuming litigation regarding the parties' respectiverights and interests. The Third-Party Release was a core negotiation point in connection with thePlan and instrumental in developing the Plan that maximized value for all of the Debtors'stakeholders and kept the Debtors intact as a going concern. As such, the Third-Party Releaseappropriately offers certain protections to parties who constructively participated in the Debtors'restructuring process—including the Consenting Creditors (as set forth above)—by, among otherthings, facilitating the negotiation and consummation of the Plan, supporting the Plan and, in thecase of the Backstop Providers, committing to provide new capital to facilitate the Debtors'emergence from chapter 11. Specifically, the Notes Ad Hoc Group proposed and negotiated thepari passu transaction that is the basis of the restructuring proposed under the Plan and provideda much-needed deleveraging to the Debtors' business while taking a discount on their Claims (inexchange for other consideration).35. Furthermore, the Third-Party Release is consensual as to all parties ininterest, including all Releasing Parties, and such parties in interest were provided notice of thechapter 11 proceedings, the Plan, the deadline to object to confirmation of the Plan, and theCombined Hearing and were properly informed that all holders of Claims against or Interests inthe Debtors that did not file an objection with the Court in the Chapter 11 Cases that included anexpress objection to the inclusion of such holder as a Releasing Party under the provisionscontained in Article VIII of the Plan would be deemed to have expressly, unconditionally,generally, individually, and collectively consented to the release and discharge of all claims andCauses of Action against the Debtors and the Released Parties. Additionally, the release provisionsCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 189 o of f1 1334519of the Plan were conspicuous, emphasized with boldface type in the Plan, the DisclosureStatement, the Ballots, and the applicable notices. Except as set forth in the Plan, all ReleasingParties were properly informed that unless they (a) checked the “opt out” box on the applicableBallot or opt-out form and returned the same in advance of the Voting Deadline, as applicable, or(b) timely Filed an objection to the releases contained in the Plan that was not resolved beforeentry of this Confirmation Order, they would be deemed to have expressly consented to the releaseof all Claims and Causes of Action against the Released Parties.36. The Ballots sent to all holders of Claims and Interests entitled to vote, aswell as the notice of the Combined Hearing sent to all known parties in interest (including thosenot entitled to vote on the Plan), unambiguously provided in bold letters that the Third-PartyRelease was contained in the Plan.37. The scope of the Third-Party Release is appropriately tailored under thefacts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases, and parties in interest received due and adequatenotice of the Third-Party Release. Among other things, the Plan provides appropriate and specificdisclosure with respect to the claims and Causes of Action that are subject to the Third-PartyRelease, and no other disclosure is necessary. The Debtors, as evidenced by the VotingDeclaration and Certificate of Publication, including by providing actual notice to all knownparties in interest, including all known holders of Claims against, and Interests in, any Debtor andpublishing notice in international and national publications for the benefit of unknown parties ininterest, provided sufficient notice of the Third-Party Release, and no further or other notice isnecessary. The Third-Party Release is designed to provide finality for the Debtors, theReorganized Debtors and the Released Parties regarding the parties' respective obligations underthe Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, and notwithstanding anything to the contrary, anyparty who timely opted-out of the Third-Party Release is not bound by the Third-PartyRelease.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 1 290 o of f1 133452038. The Third-Party Release is specific in language, integral to the Plan, andgiven for substantial consideration. The Releasing Parties were given due and adequate notice ofthe Third-Party Release, and thus the Third-Party Release is consensual under controllingprecedent as to those Releasing Parties that did not specifically and timely object. In light of,among other things, the value provided by the Released Parties to the Debtors' Estates and theconsensual and critical nature of the Third-Party Release to the Plan, the Third-Party Release isappropriatevi. Exculpation.39. The exculpation described in Article VIII.E of the Plan (the “Exculpation”)is appropriate under applicable law, including In re Highland Capital Mgmt., L.P., 48 F. 4th 419(5th Cir. 2022), because it was supported by proper evidence, proposed in good faith, wasformulated following extensive good-faith, arm's-length negotiations with key constituents, and isappropriately limited in scope.40. No Entity or Person may commence or continue any action, employ anyprocess, or take any other act to pursue, collect, recover or offset any Claim, Interest, debt,obligation, or Cause of Action relating or reasonably likely to relate to any act or commission inconnection with, relating to, or arising out of a Covered Matter (including one that alleges theactual fraud, gross negligence, or willful misconduct of a Covered Entity), unless expresslyauthorized by the Bankruptcy Court after (1) it determines, after a notice and a hearing, such Claim,Interest, debt, obligation, or Cause of Action is colorable and (2) it specifically authorizes suchEntity or Person to bring such Claim or Cause of Action. The Bankruptcy Court shall have soleand exclusive jurisdiction to determine whether any such Claim, Interest, debt, obligation or Causeof Action is colorable and, only to the extent legally permissible and as provided for in Article XI,CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 201 o of f1 1334521shall have jurisdiction to adjudicate such underlying colorable Claim, Interest, debt, obligation, orCause of Action.vii. Injunction.41. The injunction provisions set forth in Article VIII.F of the Plan are essentialto the Plan and are necessary to implement the Plan and to preserve and enforce the discharge,Debtor Release, the Third-Party Release, and the Exculpation provisions in Article VIII of thePlan. The injunction provisions are appropriately tailored to achieve those purposes.viii. Preservation of Claims and Causes of Action.42. Article IV.L of the Plan appropriately provides for the preservation by theDebtors of certain Causes of Action in accordance with section 1123(b) of the Bankruptcy Code.Causes of Action not released by the Debtors or exculpated under the Plan will be retained by theReorganized Debtors as provided by the Plan. The Plan is sufficiently specific with respect to theCauses of Action to be retained by the Debtors, and the Plan and Plan Supplement providemeaningful disclosure with respect to the potential Causes of Action that the Debtors may retain,and all parties in interest received adequate notice with respect to such retained Causes of Action.The provisions regarding Causes of Action in the Plan are appropriate and in the best interests ofthe Debtors, their respective Estates, and holders of Claims or Interests. For the avoidance of anydoubt, Causes of Action released or exculpated under the Plan will not be retained by theReorganized Debtors.c. Section 1123(d) – Cure of Defaults43. Article V.D of the Plan provides for the satisfaction of Cure Claimsassociated with each Executory Contract and Unexpired Lease to be assumed in accordance withsection 365(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code. Any monetary defaults under each assumed ExecutoryCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 212 o of f1 1334522Contract or Unexpired Lease shall be satisfied, pursuant to section 365(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode, by payment of the default amount in Cash on the Effective Date, subject to the limitationsdescribed in Article V.D of the Plan, or on such other terms as the parties to such ExecutoryContracts or Unexpired Leases may otherwise agree. Any Disputed Cure Amounts will bedetermined in accordance with the procedures set forth in Article V.D of the Plan, and applicablebankruptcy and nonbankruptcy law. As such, the Plan provides that the Debtors will Cure, orprovide adequate assurance that the Debtors will promptly Cure, defaults with respect to assumedExecutory Contracts and Unexpired Leases in accordance with section 365(b)(1) of theBankruptcy Code. Thus, the Plan complies with section 1123(d) of the Bankruptcy Code.d. Section 1129(a)(2) – Compliance of the Debtors and Others with the ApplicableProvisions of the Bankruptcy Code.44. The Debtors, as proponents of the Plan, have complied with all applicableprovisions of the Bankruptcy Code as required by section 1129(a)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code,including sections 1122, 1123, 1124, 1125, 1126, and 1128, and Bankruptcy Rules 3017, 3018,and 3019.e. Section 1129(a)(3) – Proposal of Plan in Good Faith.45. The Debtors have proposed the Plan in good faith, in accordance with theBankruptcy Code requirements, and not by any means forbidden by law. In determining that thePlan has been proposed in good faith, the Court has examined the totality of the circumstancesfiling of the Chapter 11 Cases, including the formation of Intrum AB of Texas LLC (“IntrumTexas”), the Plan itself, and the process leading to its formulation. The Debtors' good faith isevident from the facts and record of the Chapter 11 Cases, the Disclosure Statement, and the recordof the Combined Hearing and other proceedings held in the Chapter 11 CasesCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 223 o of f1 133452346. The Plan (including the Plan Supplement and all other documents necessaryto effectuate the Plan) is the product of good faith, arm's-length negotiations by and among theDebtors, the Debtors' directors and officers and the Debtors' key stakeholders, including theConsenting Creditors and each of their respective professionals. The Plan itself and the processleading to its formulation provide independent evidence of the Debtors' and such other parties'good faith, serve the public interest, and assure fair treatment of holders of Claims or Interests.Consistent with the overriding purpose of chapter 11, the Debtors Filed the Chapter 11 Cases withthe belief that the Debtors were in need of reorganization and the Plan was negotiated and proposedwith the intention of accomplishing a successful reorganization and maximizing stakeholder value,and for no ulterior purpose. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(3) of the BankruptcyCode are satisfied.f. Section 1129(a)(4) – Court Approval of Certain Payments as Reasonable.47. Any payment made or to be made by the Debtors, or by a person issuingsecurities or acquiring property under the Plan, for services or costs and expenses in connectionwith the Chapter 11 Cases, or in connection with the Plan and incident to the Chapter 11 Cases,has been approved by, or is subject to the approval of, the Court as reasonable. Accordingly, thePlan satisfies the requirements of section 1129(a)(4).g. Section 1129(a)(5)—Disclosure of Directors and Officers and Consistency with theInterests of Creditors and Public Policy.48. The identities of or process for appointment of the Reorganized Debtors'directors and officers proposed to serve after the Effective Date were disclosed in the PlanSupplement in advance of the Combined Hearing. Accordingly, the Debtors have satisfied therequirements of section 1129(a)(5) of the Bankruptcy Code.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 234 o of f1 1334524h. Section 1129(a)(6)—Rate Changes.49. The Plan does not contain any rate changes subject to the jurisdiction of anygovernmental regulatory commission and therefore will not require governmental regulatoryapproval. Therefore, section 1129(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code does not apply to the Plan.i. Section 1129(a)(7)—Best Interests of Holders of Claims and Interests.50. The liquidation analysis attached as Exhibit D to the Disclosure Statementand the other evidence in support of the Plan that was proffered or adduced at the CombinedHearing, and the facts and circumstances of the Chapter 11 Cases are (a) reasonable, persuasive,credible, and accurate as of the dates such analysis or evidence was prepared, presented orproffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c) have not beencontroverted by other evidence; and (d) establish that each holder of Allowed Claims or Interestsin each Class will recover as much or more value under the Plan on account of such Claim orInterest, as of the Effective Date, than the amount such holder would receive if the Debtors wereliquidated on the Effective Date under chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code or has accepted the Plan.As a result, the Debtors have demonstrated that the Plan is in the best interests of their creditorsand equity holders and the requirements of section 1129(a)(7) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.j. Section 1129(a)(8)—Conclusive Presumption of Acceptance by UnimpairedClasses; Acceptance of the Plan by Certain Voting Classes.51. The classes deemed to accept the Plan are Unimpaired under the Plan andare deemed to have accepted the Plan pursuant to section 1126(f) of the Bankruptcy Code. EachVoting Class voted to accept the Plan. For the avoidance of doubt, however, even if section1129(a)(8) has not been satisfied with respect to all of the Debtors, the Plan is confirmable becausethe Plan does not discriminate unfairly and is fair and equitable with respect to the Voting Classesand thus satisfies section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code with respect to such Classes as describedCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 245 o of f1 1334525further below. As a result, the requirements of section 1129(b) of the Bankruptcy Code are alsosatisfied.k. Section 1129(a)(9)—Treatment of Claims Entitled to Priority Pursuant to Section507(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.52. The treatment of Administrative Claims, Professional Fee Claims, andPriority Tax Claims under Article II of the Plan satisfies the requirements of, and complies in allrespects with, section 1129(a)(9) of the Bankruptcy Code.l. Section 1129(a)(10)—Acceptance by at Least One Voting Class.53. As set forth in the Voting Declaration, all Voting Classes overwhelminglyvoted to accept the Plan. As such, there is at least one Voting Class that has accepted the Plan,determined without including any acceptance of the Plan by any insider (as defined by theBankruptcy Code), for each Debtor. Accordingly, the requirements of section 1129(a)(10) of theBankruptcy Code are satisfied.m. Section 1129(a)(11)—Feasibility of the Plan.54. The Plan satisfies section 1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code. Thefinancial projections attached to the Disclosure Statement as Exhibit D and the other evidencesupporting the Plan proffered or adduced by the Debtors at or before the Combined Hearing: (a)is reasonable, persuasive, credible, and accurate as of the dates such evidence was prepared,presented, or proffered; (b) utilize reasonable and appropriate methodologies and assumptions; (c)has not been controverted by other persuasive evidence; (d) establishes that the Plan is feasibleand Confirmation of the Plan is not likely to be followed by liquidation or the need for furtherfinancial reorganization; (e) establishes that the Debtors will have sufficient funds available tomeet their obligations under the Plan and in the ordinary course of business—including sufficientamounts of Cash to reasonably ensure payment of Allowed Claims that will receive CashCCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 256 o of f1 1334526distributions pursuant to the terms of the Plan and other Cash payments required under the Plan;and (f) establishes that the Debtors or the Reorganized Debtors, as applicable, will have thefinancial wherewithal to pay any Claims that accrue, become payable, or are allowed by FinalOrder following the Effective Date. Accordingly, the Plan satisfies the requirements of section1129(a)(11) of the Bankruptcy Code.n. Section 1129(a)(12)—Payment of Statutory Fees.55. Article XII.C of the Plan provides that all fees payable pursuant to section1930(a) of the Judicial Code, as determined by the Court at the Confirmation Hearing inaccordance with section 1128 of the Bankruptcy Code, will be paid by each of the applicableReorganized Debtors for each quarter (including any fraction of a quarter) until the Chapter 11Cases are converted, dismissed, or closed, whichever occurs first. Accordingly, the Plan satisfiesthe requirements of section 1129(a)(12) of the Bankruptcy Code.o. Section 1129(a)(13)—Retiree Benefits.56. Pursuant to section 1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code, and as provided inArticle IV.K of the Plan, the Reorganized Debtors will continue to pay all obligations on accountof retiree benefits (as such term is used in section 1114 of the Bankruptcy Code) on and after theEffective Date in accordance with applicable law. As a result, the requirements of section1129(a)(13) of the Bankruptcy Code are satisfied.p. Sections 1129(a)(14), (15), and (16)—Domestic Support Obligations, Individuals,and Nonprofit Corporations.57. The Debtors do not owe any domestic support obligations, are notindividuals, and are not nonprofit corporations. Therefore, sections 1129(a)(14), 1129(a)(15), and1129(a)(16) of the Bankruptcy Code do not apply to the Chapter 11 Cases.CCaassee 2 244-9-900557755 D Dooccuummeennt t2 29663-2 F Fileiledd i nin T TXXSSBB o onn 1 021/3/113/2/245 P Paaggee 2 267 o of f1 1334527q. Section 1129(b)—Confirmation of the Plan Over Nonacceptance of VotingClasses.58. No Classes rejected the Plan, and section 1129(b) is not applicable here,but even if it were, the Plan may be confirmed pursuant to section 1129(b)(1) of the BankruptcyCode because the Plan is fair and equitable with respect to the Deemed Rejecting Classes. ThePlan has been proposed in good faith, is reasonable, and meets the requirements and all VotingClasses have voted to accept the Plan. The treatment of Intercompany Claims and IntercompanyInterests under the Plan provides for administrative convenience does not constitute a distributionunder the Plan on account of suc

Today we're joined by Nixo, Chief Nerd Wrangler at EthStaker. In this episode we discuss: * EthStaker * Why stake?* Beacon chain * ETH staking volume* Issuance sustainability/solo stakers* Professional node operators * Staked ETH landscape* Data labelling: rated network issues/solo stakers* Where to go from here* Coinbase validators/correlation penalties * Penalty rebalancing* Do we even need solo stakers?* Network vs hardware: onboarding solo staker issues * Solo stakes maintenance * Host diversity  And much more—enjoy!—Chapters:(00:00) Introduction(01:31) Nixo's background (03:42) EthStaker (05:00) Why stake?(07:37) Timeline: Beacon chain (10:10) Macro: ETH staking(16:55) Issuance sustainability/solo stakers(20:41) Professional node operators (22:05) ETH staked breakdown(27:36) Data labelling: rated network issues/solo stakers(31:30) Where to go from here(38:56) Coinbase validators/correlation penalties (44:02) Penalty rebalancing effectiveness (46:58) other solo staker problems (50:38) Do we even need solo stakers?(59:25) Network vs hardware: onboarding solo staker issues (1:02:44) Solo stakes maintenance (1:06:31) Host diversity  (1:12:44) Outro—The Indexed Podcast discusses hot topics, trendy metrics and chart crimes in the crypto industry every 1st and 3rd Thursday of the month - brought to you by wizards @hildobby_ @0xBoxer @sui414.Subscribe to our channel and leave a comment to help us make the pod better!Follow the Indexed Podcast on Twitter: https://twitter.com/indexed_pod—Follow Nixo here:https://x.com/nixorokish—DISCLAIMER: All information presented here should not be relied upon as legal, financial, investment, tax or even life advice. The views expressed in the podcast are not representative of hosts' employers views. We are acting independently of our respective professional roles.

Darren Marble knows something that Wall Street doesn't want YOU to know, and he's going to share it with us, along with many more business and marketing topics, in this episode. --- Darren Marble is the CEO and founder of CrowdFundX, a leading digital marketing agency specializing in raising capital for private companies through online platforms. He is also the co-founder of Going Public, a groundbreaking television series that showcases companies going public via Regulation A+ offerings. Additionally, Darren is the founder of Issuance, a technology company that simplifies the process of issuing securities and managing investor relations for private companies. Like this episode? Watch more like it

Elevated issuance continues but the market is absorbing it in an orderly fashion Follow UsTwitter @NYLInvestmentsTwitter @MacKayMuniMgrsFacebook @NYLInvestmentsLinkedIn: New York Life InvestmentsLinkedIn: MacKay Municipal ManagersPresented by New York Life Investmentswww.newyorklifeinvestments.com MacKay Municipal Managers is a team of portfolio managers at MacKay Shields. MacKay Shields is 100% owned by NYLIM Holdings, which is wholly owned by New York Life Insurance Company. “New York Life Investments” is both a service mark, and the common trade name, of certain investment advisors affiliated with New York Life Insurance Company.

The International Criminal Court (ICC) announced arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, accusing them of crimes tied to Israel's defense operations in Gaza. Why should supporters of Israel—regardless of political views—reject these accusations?  Belle Yoeli, AJC's Chief Advocacy Officer, explains why the ICC's charges are not only baseless but also undermine justice, distort international law, and fuel harmful narratives following the deadliest antisemitic attack since the Holocaust. Listen – AJC Podcasts: The Forgotten Exodus: with Hen Mazzig, Einat Admony, and more. People of the Pod:  What President-Elect Trump's Nominees Mean for Israel, Antisemitism, and More What the Election Results Mean for Israel and the Jewish People The Jewish Vote in Pennsylvania: What You Need to Know Go Deeper – AJC Analysis: Statement: American Jewish Committee Appalled by ICC's Issuance of Arrest Warrants Against Israelis Explainer: What You Need to Know About the ICC and the Israel-Hamas War Follow People of the Pod on your favorite podcast app, and learn more at AJC.org/PeopleofthePod You can reach us at: peopleofthepod@ajc.org If you've appreciated this episode, please be sure to tell your friends, and rate and review us on Apple Podcasts or Spotify. __ Transcript of Conversation with Belle Yoeli: Manya Brachear Pashman:   The International Criminal Court announced on Thursday that it issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defense minister. You have Galant as well as Hamas terrorist Mohammed, if the Court said it had found reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Galant quote, each bear criminal responsibility for starvation as a method of warfare and crimes against humanity, end quote. All tied to Israel's military operations in Gaza focused on defeating Hamas terrorists, securing the return of the 101 remaining hostages and preventing more attacks.  Here to talk about why the court is prosecuting Israel's leaders for its defense operation after the country suffered the deadliest antisemitic attack since the Holocaust, and why that's dangerous, is Belle Yoeli, AJC's Chief advocacy officer. Belle, welcome to People of the Pod. Belle Yoeli:   Thanks so much, Manya. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Do Belle, why have warrants been issued for Netanyahu and Gallant. Belle Yoeli:   Right. So first and foremost, I just want to make it abundantly clear, and it really needs to be said, that this decision is absolutely outrageous. It's a gross distortion of international law and so many other things. It undermines the credibility of the court, and it fuels a lot of malicious lies about the state of Israel and its self defensive activities in Gaza since October 7. I will share the Court's reasoning for the warrants, and you alluded to it, quote, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed from at least the eighth of October, until at least the 20th of May 2024. The court claims they found reasonable grounds that Netanyahu and Gallant, again, quote, bear criminal responsibility for the following crimes as co-perpetrators for committing the acts jointly with others. The war crime of starvation as a method of warfare, and the crimes against humanity of murder, persecution and other inhumane acts. That's the direct quote, obviously very hard to read. And of course, AJC fundamentally rejects these claims, as do the United States and many, many leading international law and warfare experts. This is just a total and complete failure of justice. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So why should supporters of Israel stand firmly against this accusation, no matter what their political views are? In other words, if they're not fans of Netanyahu, but they are ardent supporters of Israel, why should they stand firm against this?  Belle Yoeli:   Yeah, it's an important question, and we have to be clear. I mean, the court has politicized this by sort of taking this unprecedented action. But this is not about political issues, it's not about Netanyahu or Gallant. This is about the truth. This is about right and wrong, and the claims that are being made here are so outrageous and malicious. I mean, Israel is not intentionally starving Palestinian civilians or committing crimes. It just doesn't make sense.  If it were, it would not be facilitating tons and tons of aid into the Gaza Strip every day, not to mention polio vaccines. I mean, the list goes on and on. Israel, like any other country, is defending itself, and not just in Gaza against Hamas, but on seven fronts, including Hezbollah and Lebanon, against Iranian proxies.  And look, we've said it from the beginning, since Israel responded in this self defensive way, and we'll say it again: civilians die in war, and that is a terrible, horrible thing. But Israel is fighting its war in Gaza in response to Hamas' actions on October 7. It's about bringing the hostages home and preventing the ability of Hamas to attack Israeli civilians. And it's been said by many experts that Israel is conducting itself in this war in an unprecedented manner, in a positive way. And I know that's hard for people to grasp, because, again, people have died, Palestinians have died, and, yes, civilians have died, and that's terrible. But that doesn't take away from the fact that Israel is trying to prevent civilian death and why it's fighting this war, and none of that has to do with intentionally harming civilians. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So I want to back up here and talk about who is actually pressing these charges, who is actually issuing these warrants and making these accusations in this case. For people who may not be familiar or they may be confused between the International Criminal Court and another international court, the International Court of Justice, which has a separate case against Israel and is connected to the United Nations. So what is the International Criminal Court? How is it different than the ICJ? Belle Yoeli:   So you mean, not everybody is a legal scholar? It's quite confusing, and I'm grateful for my colleagues who have really helped us try to explain this to everyone, and I'll try to break it down for you as simply as I can. So the ICC is an independent, international judicial tribunal. It's based in the Hague, and it was created in 2002 by the Rome Statute.  And that's a treaty that essentially spells out what crimes this specific body, the ICC, should investigate and adjudicate when it can. And the ICC's jurisdiction is essentially that it can prosecute individuals for war crimes, crimes against humanity, genocide and aggression. That's four categories.  And it's allowed to prosecute not just state actors, but also non-state actors. And when you think about the ICC, as colleagues have explained to me, you really are supposed to think about it as a court of last resort. So when you think about national legal systems, and respecting the right that sovereign states have their own courts and that should be respected, the ICC would step in when an important crime or a crime did not get prosecuted. That's what this body is meant for, and again, trying to respect sovereign states. Now, by contrast, the ICJ is the judicial arm of the UN, the United Nations, and the ICJ is supposed to settle legal disputes between states, and it also can issue opinions upon requests by UN entities. So there are two different bodies, two very different purposes. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So is Israel a member of the ICC? Belle Yoeli:   So Israel is not a member of the ICC. And this is actually sort of interesting. Israel was involved in drafting the Rome Statute that I mentioned, that created the ICC, that treaty. But things got a little complicated, which is not so surprising when you hear why. Essentially, the ICC, as we discussed, was intended to focus on these most heinous crimes, right?  But eventually the entity was urged by several Arab countries, and the majority of the countries that are party to the ICC agreed, to add as one of the categories of things that can be investigated and prosecuted, the transfer of civilians into occupied territory. And so if you hear that, I'm sure a ping goes off, obviously based on Israel and its situation and dynamics in the region. Israel took this as a sign that countries were aiming to distort the purpose of the body and really to try to just prosecute Israelis for actions in the West Bank, for example. So it ended up refraining from joining. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So now, countries cannot be prosecuted by the ICC, right? I mean, I understand that Israel as a country can't be prosecuted, but Israelis can be, and that's why the warrants issued named Netanyahu and Gallant. Belle Yoeli:   So technically, the body is supposed to go after individuals. But the question here, of the warrants is about jurisdiction, right? And clearly there's a disagreement. The Israelis, the United States and others have said that the ICC has no jurisdiction over, you know, for the warrants they've issued. And AJC agrees.  The Palestinians and actually, the court itself have said that it's based on certain technicalities which are actually quite complicated, and you can read about in our explainer on our website about this subject, that there is jurisdiction. But for me, the thing that is most clear here is that as we reference, Israel has a strong, independent judiciary, and even when it comes to the conflict. Most recent conflicts is October 7, Israel's own military Advocate General has in fact, opened dozens of investigations into incidents.  So when you consider the fact that Israel has a mechanism for investigating things that are happening in Gaza, that in itself, should tell everyone that the ICC has no jurisdiction here based on its own treaty. So yes, these warrants were issued, but from our perspective, there's really no jurisdiction. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Okay, so would you say the fog of war makes this almost impossible to adjudicate, or is this, in your eyes, an open and shut case? Is it abundantly clear that Israeli leaders have avoided committing these crimes they're accused of? Belle Yoeli:   So, I mean, to me, it's open and shut for a few reasons, right? We've mentioned them. One, the ICC has no jurisdiction. Two, the claims are, of the crimes are, are false and really offensive. And, you know, there is, of course, this phrase, the fog of war, and there's always fog in war. But this is really not what it's about. The travesty in all of this is that Israel does so much in an unprecedented environment that shows that the claims that are being made are untrue.  So, yes, the technicalities, yes, there's no jurisdiction. The claims are offensive. But it's more than that. This is so clearly being politicized, because, yes, people are upset about what's happening and the conflict, and we understand that the entire world is reacting, but it's just not true. It's just about truth here, and what the court is suggesting is simply not true, and really targeting Israel in a way that is against justice and is really unheard of. Manya Brachear Pashman:   So here in America, we are amid a leadership transition. Has the response differed between the Biden administration and the incoming Trump administration? Belle Yoeli:   So from what we've seen so far, I mean, the Biden administration and incoming administration officials from the Trump administration have both spoken out and both rejected the decision outright. You'll see, and I think we'll see in the coming days, there are differences of opinion also in Congress about how to deal with this action. And this been, this has been in conversation, you know, discussion for months when this was first raised, that this could possibly happen, questions around sanctions and different actions that can be taken. But I think we'll know a lot more about concrete potential proposals and next steps in the coming days. Manya Brachear Pashman:   And what about the international community? Belle Yoeli:   You know, it's interesting, at this point, when we're as of this recording, the international response has actually been quite muted, and I think that's because countries are trying to balance upholding the respect for the court and the idea of the court and its jurisdiction with this really outrageous decision that I think many of them know is is false and wrong and has really bad implications for what the court is meant to do. You know, some have been quite clear. Just to name a few, Argentina and Paraguay spoke out forcefully. Some responses have been a bit more murky. I think, trying to thread that needle that I mentioned, like the United Kingdom had a pretty murky response. And actually, the EU high representative who's thankfully on his way out, Joseph Burrell, really fully embraced the decision in a sort of grotesque way. But this isn't new for him. He's fairly problematic on these types of issues. So we'll see how other countries react. You know, more things are in play, and I'm sure Israel and the United States are having close conversations with allies. I think the US even alluded to that, and we'll have a better sense of what's to come soon. Manya Brachear Pashman:   And so what does this mean for Israel and for the ongoing Israel-Hamas war? Belle Yoeli:   I mean, I don't have a crystal ball. I can say, look, it remains to be seen what will happen next. I think countries who are party to the ICC need to do the right thing. They need to reject the jurisdiction and really refuse to enforce the warrants. That's the most important piece here. That's what we're hoping to see.  I think we'll see that international pressure likely be applied by the United States and others. But the bigger picture here, I mean, again, it speaks to the travesty that I spoke about before. It's this larger attempt to delegitimize Israel and really discredit and slander Israel, I would even go so far to say, is just unjust, and it fuels all of the disinformation that we're seeing.  And what does that lead to? It leads to hate. It leads to hate against Israelis, and let's be honest, it puts Jews around the world at risk at a time when there's already surging antisemitism. This isn't new. Look at what happened in Amsterdam.  So more broadly, this just, this hits. This is an issue and so problematic in so many ways, and it just, it does so much harm and the ideals of democracy and the ideas of justice, it's really unprecedented and unforgivable. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Do you think it gets in the way of bringing the hostages home? Belle Yoeli:   Unfortunately, the reality is that it's been difficult enough as it is to bring the hostages home, and we just haven't seen movement in negotiations. And obviously we're praying for that every day. I couldn't tell you how this will impact that. I don't, I don't see an immediate connection. I think, look, we need to be clear that every action like this contributes to a feeling in Israel of already, sort of, as they say in conflict negotiation or resolution speak. like a siege mentality, right? Israelis feel under attack. The government likely feels under attack, and so it certainly doesn't help when Israel is trying to defend itself, to carry out war and to bring the hostages home, it certainly doesn't help, but how it will affect actual negotiations, I couldn't say. Manya Brachear Pashman:   Belle, thank you so much for sharing your insights and trying to explain this to our listeners. Belle Yoeli:   Thank you so much for having me.    

Some new issues are oversubscribed Follow UsTwitter @NYLInvestmentsTwitter @MacKayMuniMgrsFacebook @NYLInvestmentsLinkedIn: New York Life InvestmentsLinkedIn: MacKay Municipal ManagersPresented by New York Life Investmentswww.newyorklifeinvestments.com MacKay Municipal Managers is a team of portfolio managers at MacKay Shields. MacKay Shields is 100% owned by NYLIM Holdings, which is wholly owned by New York Life Insurance Company. “New York Life Investments” is both a service mark, and the common trade name, of certain investment advisors affiliated with New York Life Insurance Company. Short Description (If the description is too long. Used for Apple Podcasts): What's up this week in the municipal markets? Find out. The Muni 360 Weekly Wrap Up Podcast covers the municipal landscape from the lens of the trading desk, supply/demand dynamics, views on volatility, and key themes for investors to consider. 

Tune in to this episode of the Security Token Show where this week Herwig Konings covers the industry leading headlines and market movements, including the RWA chain wars and more tokenization market activity!   Special Announcement, STM will be revealing a special project on Tuesday at the Benzinga Future of Digital Assets conference, live in NYC and livestream: https://www.benzinga.com/digital-assets  Join the TokenizeThis 2025 waitlist at summit.stm.co!   Company of the Week - Herwig: BUIDL   The Market Movements Liquidity Products Go Multi-Chain: BUIDL and BENJI: https://securitize.io/learn/press/blackRock-launches-new-buidl-share-classes-across-multiple-blockchains https://blockworks.co/news/franklin-templeton-launches-benji-on-ethereum    First Tokenized Fund Rated by Moody's and Particula: Anemoy's LTF, Managed by Janus Henderson: https://centrifuge.mirror.xyz/6rlZ9ZD9OPRuFwVj5cRvguaqAEelyUMEnlgOyvphKOo   Tether Launches Hadron RWA Tokenization Platform: https://tether.io/news/hadron-by-tether-platform-brings-simplified-asset-tokenization-to-the-mass-market/   Arca and BlockTower to Merge for Growth in Digital Asset Space: https://www.ar.ca/blog/arca-and-blocktower-intend-to-merge-unlocking-synergies-and-growth-opportunities Tokenized Burgers: Furahaa Group's Issuance on INX, Live November 20th: https://www.coinspeaker.com/french-fast-food-chain-furahaa-group-enters-tokenization-market-inx-listing/  Avalon Labs Launches USDa: Bitcoin-Backed, Overcollateralized Stablecoin: https://www.cryptotimes.io/2024/11/12/avalon-labs-launches-bitcoin-backed-usda-stablecoin/ ⏰ TABLE OF CONTENTS ⏰ 0:16 Introduction 0:52 Special Announcement: Project Reveal at Benzinga on Tuesday, TokenizeThis 2025 2:31 Market Movements 17:15 Company of The Week: BUIDL

This week's Espresso covers news from Stay, Oxpay, Patagon and more!Outline of this episode:[00:27] – Central da Visão raises $1.7M Series A[00:49] – Stay raises $2.6M to expand private pension offerings in Brazil[01:07] – Oxpay raises $3.5M from SRM Ventures[01:21] – Patagon AI raises $1.1M to expand AI-powered sales in LATAM[01:35] – Latii raises $5M to streamline construction materials supply[01:58] – Nubank partners with FINABIEN to expand Cuenta Nu deposit network in Mexico[02:15] – Brota Superfoods raises $630K from Manutara Ventures[02:28] – Plata Card raises $55M through the issuance of bonds[02:50] – Cervello raises $2.2M funding round[03:07] – Multiledgers raises $1M in a round led by Oxygea Ventures and Indicator Capital[03:28] – Interview with Cinthia Merlos, Cofounder and COO of Vexi[03:47] – LatamList's bi-weekly overview of the Latin America startup sceneResources & people mentioned:Startups: Central da Visão, Stay, Oxpay, Patagon.AI, Latii, Nubank, Brota Superfoods, Vexi, Plata Card, Multiledgers, CervelloVCs: HT3 Investimentos, Maya Capital, Better Tomorrow Ventures, SRM Ventures, OneVC, 17Sigma, Leadout Capital, Manutara Ventures, Oxygea Ventures,  Indicator Capital, E3 InnovationOrganizations: FINABIEN, ScotiabankPeople: Cinthia Merlos

Liens arising from a CICO (Chief Integrity and Compliance Officer) investigation typically relate to financial or legal claims against property as part of an investigation into potential violations of laws or regulations within an organization. Here's an explanation of how such liens can come about:Nature of CICO Investigations:A CICO investigation is usually initiated to ensure that an organization complies with legal and ethical standards. This can involve probing into financial misconduct, regulatory breaches, or other compliance issues.The Chief Integrity and Compliance Officer oversees these investigations to identify and address any areas where the organization may have failed to adhere to relevant laws or regulations.Issuance of Liens:During these investigations, if there is evidence suggesting financial impropriety or other violations that might result in financial penalties or the need for restitution, liens can be issued.A lien is a legal claim against assets that ensures the entity under investigation fulfills its financial obligations. This can involve freezing assets or placing a hold on property to prevent the sale or transfer of assets until the investigation concludes and any penalties are paid.Purpose of Liens:Securing Penalties: If the investigation reveals that fines, penalties, or restitution are due, the lien ensures that the organization cannot evade these financial responsibilities by transferring or hiding assets.Ensuring Compliance: Liens act as a preventive measure, ensuring that the organization remains compliant with legal requirements and that the integrity of the investigation is maintained.Types of Liens:Judicial Liens: These are placed following a court order and are typically the result of a legal judgment against the organization.Statutory Liens: These arise automatically by operation of law, often related to taxes or other statutory obligations.Voluntary Liens: Sometimes, an organization may agree to a lien as part of a settlement agreement to resolve the investigation.Process:The CICO, in collaboration with legal and financial experts, assesses the situation.If the need for a lien is identified, it is filed with the relevant authorities to secure the organization's assets.The organization is notified of the lien, and they are required to resolve the underlying issues before the lien can be lifted.Resolution:The lien remains in place until the organization addresses all compliance issues, pays any fines, or fulfills any financial obligations resulting from the investigation.Once the obligations are met, the lien can be removed, and the organization can regain full control over its assets.In this episode, we take another trip down the sewer of Jeffrey Epstein's criminal enterprise and get a look at the USVI's objection to the estate's motion to remove liens. (commercial at 15:15)to contact me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comsource:DisplayFile.aspx (vicourts.org)Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

High-grade US corporate bond issuance will rise again in 2025, building on this year's record-setting pace, according to Goldman Sachs. “There's a lot of growth in the economy that needs to take place, as well as all of the refi,” Jonny Fine, Goldman's global head of investment grade debt tells Bloomberg News' James Crombie and and Bloomberg Intelligence's Arnold Kakuda in the latest Credit Edge podcast. Refinancing will account for the bulk of the sales, while infrastructure finance and buyouts will boost volume as the economy expands. Fine and Kakuda also discuss the rise of private credit, how regulation and Basel endgame will affect bond markets and the differences between bank financing in the US and Europe, including Additional Tier 1 bonds. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Stephen Miran is a former senior advisor to the US Treasury Department, a senior strategist at Hudson Bay Capital, and a fellow at the Manhattan Institute. Stephen is also a returning guest to the podcast, and he rejoins David on Macro Musings to talk about his recent paper with Nouriel Roubini titled, *Activist Treasury Issuance and the Tug-of-War Over Monetary Policy,* as well as his thoughts on what a second Trump presidential term would mean for the Fed and financial markets.   Transcript for this week's episode.   Stephen's Twitter: @SteveMiran Stephen's Manhattan Institute profile   David Beckworth's Twitter: @DavidBeckworth Follow us on Twitter: @Macro_Musings   Check out our new AI chatbot: the Macro Musebot! Join the new Macro Musings Discord server!   Join the Macro Musings mailing list! Check out our Macro Musings merch!   Related Links:   *ATI: Activist Treasury Issuance and the Tug-of-War Over Monetary Policy* by Stephen Miran and Nouriel Roubini   *Trump Wants a Weaker Dollar But Wall Street Doubts He'll Get One* by Saleha Mohsin and Carter Johnson   *Trump Allies Draw Up Plans to Blunt Fed's Independence* by Andrew Restuccia, Nick Timiraos, and Alex Leary   Timestamps:   (00:00:00) – Intro   (00:01:49) – Breaking Down *Activist Treasury Issuance and the Tug-of-War Over Monetary Policy*   (00:21:33) – Responding to Criticism from Janet Yellen and Others   (00:28:21) – Addressing Trump's Push for a Weaker Dollar   (00:38:24) – Can We Weaken the Dollar While Still Ensuring Its Use?   (00:43:07) – What a Second Trump Term Would Mean for Fed Independence and Crypto   (00:49:19) – Outro

Ever wished you could play real-life Shark Tank from your living room? Well, buckle up because this episode of The Liquid Lunch Project is about to blow your entrepreneurial mind!  We sit down with Darren Marble, the Executive Producer of Going Public® and CEO of Issuance. Darren's here to share his wild journey from Wall Street to Hollywood, creating an interactive TV series that lets you, yes YOU, click-to-invest in startups as you watch. Get ready to dive into the chaos, the genius, and the downright insanity of blending reality TV with real-life investing.   Episode Highlights: Crazy or Genius? Darren's vision to merge Hollywood and Wall Street Five Years in the Making: The rollercoaster ride of launching season one Ten Puzzle Pieces: Navigating the legal and financial labyrinth to bring Going Public® to life The Click-to-Invest Revolution: How you can become an investor without leaving your couch Star Power: Featuring NBA superstar Baron Davis and other celeb cameos No Fluff Zone: Darren's take on resilience, grit, and why most founders quit too soon Sobriety as a Superpower: Darren's personal journey and its impact on his entrepreneurial success Who is Darren?  Darren is the mastermind behind Going Public®, a groundbreaking TV series that turns viewers into investors. Not only is he shaking up the TV world, but he's also the CEO of Issuance, a fintech powerhouse that's transforming how companies raise capital. Darren's the kind of entrepreneur who thinks outside the box, then blows the box up and builds a spaceship instead. Don't miss this electrifying episode to discover how you can join the investment revolution from your living room and maybe even get inspired to create your own game-changing idea.    Favorite Quote: “Our vision here is to create the CNBC of private markets. It's a big vision, it's audacious, but we've got something unique.”   Connect with Darren: www.goingpublic.com www.issuance.com https://www.instagram.com/goingpublic/?hl=en  https://www.linkedin.com/in/darrenmarble/  https://twitter.com/darrenmarble?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor   Stay Connected: Connect with Matt and Luigi on Instagram: @matthew.r.meehan @luigi_rosabianca @theLiquidLunchProject @ShieldAdvisoryGroup Visit The Liquid Lunch Project website and subscribe to The Weekly, our Friday morning newsletter, for all the latest in the world of finance, tech, small business, and more. www.theliquidlunchproject.com Make sure you never miss an episode — check out The Liquid Lunch Project on Apple Podcasts, and don't forget to subscribe, rate, and review.

Host Jennifer Sanasie breaks down the news in the crypto industry from the tokens trading at a discount on WazirX after the exploit to top banks in Italy completing a digital bond issuance using blockchain rails.To get the show every day, follow the podcast here."CoinDesk Daily" host Jennifer Sanasie breaks down the biggest headlines in the crypto industry today, as tokens on WazirX were trading at a steep discount following the exploit of the exchange. Plus, Galaxy Digital has acquired substantially all the assets of blockchain node operator CryptoManufaktur LLC and Italy's top banks CDP and Intesa Sanpaolo completed a digital bond issuance using blockchain rails.-This episode was hosted by Jennifer Sanasie. “CoinDesk Daily” is produced by Jennifer Sanasie and Melissa Montañez and edited by Victor Chen.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.