|Bid||11.55 x 28000|
|Ask||11.64 x 21500|
|Day's range||11.57 - 11.82|
|52-week range||4.99 - 12.15|
|Beta (5Y monthly)||1.41|
|PE ratio (TTM)||N/A|
|Forward dividend & yield||N/A (N/A)|
|Ex-dividend date||19 May 2017|
|1y target est||9.36|
Deutsche Bank announced today its appointment as depositary bank for the NYSE-listed American Depositary Receipt program of Kuke Music Holding Limited.
(Bloomberg) -- New York City will end all business with the Trump Organization after President Donald Trump encouraged mobs to storm the Capitol in Washington, Mayor Bill de Blasio said.“The contracts make very clear: If the leadership of a company is engaged in illegal activity, we have the right to sever the contract, the mayor said Wednesday on an appearance on MSNBC. “Inciting an insurrection against the U.S. government clearly constitutes criminal activity.”The city expects a legal challenge, but “we’re on strong legal ground,” de Blasio said. “They have profited from these contracts. They will profit no longer.”Eric Trump, the president’s son, who helps run the family business, said the group plans to “fight vigorously,” in a statement.“The city of New York has no legal right to proceed, they will owe the Trump Organization over $30 million,” Trump said. “This is nothing more than political discrimination.”New York will join a parade of businesses that are refusing to work with the besieged president after he encouraged a mob of supporters to storm the Capitol last week. He has been abandoned by Deutsche Bank, the PGA of America and the Cushman & Wakefield real-estate services firm, and a swathe of corporations are promising to end contributions to Trump’s supporters in Congress.Read More: Trump Sparks a Crisis for His Empire Before Returning to ItThe Trump Organization has more than $17 million in contracts with New York City. Many are for iconic tourist attractions, including a golf course, a carousel and two ice rinks. One, the Wollman Skating Rink in Central Park, generated $9.4 million in income for the Trump Organization, according to its most recent financial disclosures. The contracts for the carousel and rinks were set to expire in April 2021, with the golf course contract ending in 2035.The administration will be notifying the Trump Organization that the city will cancel its agreements to operate the Central Park Carousel, Wollman and Lasker skating rinks and Ferry Point Golf Course in accordance. The contracts for the carousel and the ice rinks, would end in coming weeks, the Mayor said.The process for terminating the Ferry Point Golf Course is more detailed and is expected to take months, De Blasio said in a statement.The contract with the city to operate the golf course stipulates that it must be eligible for major tournaments, and the PGA’s decision Sunday to pull out of a 2022 scheduled PGA championship at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, New Jersey, would appear to abrogate that term, de Blasio said.The de Blasio administration has looked into canceling its agreements with the company several times in the past six years, including in 2015 after Trump made remarks attacking Latinos during his first presidential campaign.De Blasio said the city will choose new vendors to operate the concessions in the park. “They’ll probably challenge us in court. We’re on strong legal ground,” he said. “We will get new vendors to come in and take over quickly.”(Updates with additional information on the contracts)For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2021 Bloomberg L.P.
(Bloomberg) -- Some of the world’s biggest banks are urging a U.S. judge not to immediately terminate Libor after a group of borrowers filed suit claiming the benchmark was the work of a “price-fixing cartel.”Defendants in the case, including JPMorgan Chase & Co., Credit Suisse Group AG and Deutsche Bank AG, said in a November filing that an injunction abruptly ending the London interbank offered rate would wreak havoc on financial markets and undermine years of work reforming the reference rate. The plaintiffs, which include 27 consumer borrowers and credit card users, are also seeking monetary damages.Attorneys not involved in the case say the chances of an injunction are slim. Yet it underscores the risks and legal costs for banks that continue to prop up Libor, which still underpins hundreds of trillions of dollars of financial assets around the world. It also highlights the fragility of the discredited benchmark, which in theory could be halted by a single court decision.“You have to take it seriously because it would be a catastrophe if it was granted,” said Anne Beaumont, a partner at law firm Friedman Kaplan Seiler & Adelman LLP. “They’re likely going to continue to get sued like this as long as it’s there.”A San Francisco judge has said he will render a decision on the injunction without a hearing. The judge is scheduled Thursday to hear a request by the banks to transfer the case to Manhattan federal court.Libor is derived from a daily survey of bankers who estimate how much they would charge each other to borrow. It’s used to help determine the cost of borrowing around the world, from student loans and mortgages to interest-rate swaps and collateralized loan obligations.In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, regulators discovered that lenders had been manipulating the rates to their advantage, resulting in billions of dollars of fines.For over three years, policy makers around the globe have been developing new benchmarks to replace Libor by the end of 2021. In November, officials proposed an extension for some dollar Libor tenors until mid-2023, to help firms cope with the transition process.If the benchmark were to be immediately switched off, many derivatives contracts already contain contractual fallback language that would enable them to transition to an alternative rate, according to Y. Daphne Coelho-Adam, a counsel at Seward & Kissel LLP who is not involved in the case. But hundreds of billions of dollars of bonds, loans and securitizations lack a clear replacement rate and could pose a threat to financial stability.Defendants in the case also include UBS Group AG, Citigroup Inc., HSBC Holdings Plc and ICE Benchmark Administration Ltd., which oversees the rate.‘Price Fixing’“It must be stopped one way or another or neutralized because it’s an illegal price-fixing agreement,” Joseph Alioto, an attorney at Alioto Law Firm representing the plaintiffs, said in an interview. Banks argue “that the sky is falling and all kinds of economic havoc will take place. In the United States that doesn’t matter,” he said. “If you’re fixing prices you can’t do it, regardless of the consequences or the business excuse.”The plaintiffs want Libor to be either prohibited or set at zero with borrowers repaying capital but not interest.The banks said in filing that none of the plaintiffs have shown that they ever paid interest based on Libor, adding that the suit is built on “baseless theories of antitrust liability.” Regulators have warned that even a temporary disturbance of Libor could devastate financial markets, the banks’ attorneys said.“Plaintiffs allege that the highly regulated process of setting a benchmark that is a fundamental part of the global economy is a per se antitrust violation,” the banks said. “But legitimate cooperative activities, even those involving competitors, often benefit competition.”Organizations including the International Swaps and Derivatives Association and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are supporting the banks. In a separate filing, they argue that without mechanisms to determine future borrowing costs, parties would spend “substantial resources” negotiating price schedules, and could be forced to use fixed rates.Attorneys for the banks didn’t respond to emailed requests for comment.(Adds details on filing from ISDA, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, in penultimate paragraph.)For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.comSubscribe now to stay ahead with the most trusted business news source.©2021 Bloomberg L.P.