Hoist Kredit AB (publ)

Transcription

FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
ISSUER IN-DEPTH
7 July 2016
FAQ: Strong Deposit Base and Sound Capitalisation Drive
Recent Upgrade
Summary
RATINGS
LT Senior Unsecured
Ba1
Subordinated MTN
(P)B1
Baseline Credit
Assessment
We recently upgraded our long-term senior unsecured and issuer ratings of Hoist Kredit AB
(publ) (Hoist) to Ba1 stable from Ba2 (review up), while affirming the issuer's baseline credit
assessment (BCA) at ba3. This report answers some key questions relating to our action.
ba3
CR Assessment (LT / ST)
Baa3(cr) / P-3(cr)
KEY METRICS:
2015
2014
2013
Total
Assets, SEK
bn
17.5
15.1
12.0
Common
Equity, SEK
bn
2.3
1.4
0.8
Return on
Equity, %
13
16
16
Source: Company reports
Analyst Contacts
Aleksander
44-20-7772-1954
Henskjold
Associate Analyst
[email protected]
Dany Castiglione
44-20-7772-1070
Vice President
[email protected]
Oscar Heemskerk
44-20-7772-5532
Associate Managing
Director
[email protected]
Sean Marion
44-20-7772-1056
Managing Director Financial Institutions
[email protected]
Hoist is one of the largest debt purchasers in Europe, with SEK19.4 billion ($2.3 billion) in
estimated remaining collections (ERC) over the next 120 months and SEK4.4 billion acquired
portfolios in 2015. The company operates in 11 countries, acquiring and managing debt in ten
countries across the continent, as well as taking deposits in Sweden (Aaa/P-1 stable), with
plans to expand into new markets over the coming years.
Hoist's ba3 BCA balances the company’s strong deposit base, sizable liquidity portfolio, and
sound capitalisation level against the valuation and pricing risks associated with acquiring
non-performing loan (NPL) portfolios, as well as the concentration risk stemming from
limited suppliers, lower profitability than pure debt purchasing peers and the company's
monoline business model.
The Ba1 long-term senior unsecured and issuer ratings reflects our expectation that Hoist's
liability structure provides protection to senior unsecured creditors in a default event,
because losses are diluted among a greater mass of debt.
Q1: What does Hoist do?
Hoist is a Swedish debt purchaser with operations in 11 European countries, taking internet
deposits in Sweden and acquiring and managing debt in ten other European countries.
Hoist's business model has been focused on purchasing NPL portfolios since 1994. In 2009,
the company introduced a deposit-taking scheme. Subsequently, the deposits contributed to
significant balance sheet growth from SEK2.5 billion total assets at year-end 2008 to SEK17.4
billion at the end of March 2016. In March 2015, Hoist Finance AB (publ), Hoist's parent
company, was listed on the Nasdaq OMX Stockholm stock exchange, providing another
avenue for capital growth. The Swedish Financial Supervisory Authority (SFSA) regulates
Hoist as a credit market company, making the company subject to capital requirements.
At the end of 2015, the company had over 1200 employees spread across nine European
countries, around a third of which were located in the UK (Aa1 negative). This UK
concentration reflects Hoist’s three acquisitions in the UK since 2012: Robinson Way in 2012,
Lewis Group in 2013, and Compello in 2015. Hoist's expansion continued in 2016, and the
company announced a strategic partnership with Qualco S.A. and PricewaterhouseCoopers
MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE
Business Solutions S.A. in Greece on 5 April, and entered the Spanish market with an acquisition on 17 June (see Exhibit 1). The
acquisition in Spain consisted only of an NPL portfolio and was of limited size (below 2% of total acquired loan portfolios). Hoist
entering into these two new markets is in line with the company’s expansion strategy and we expect the company to use the
partnership in Greece as a springboard for further expansion locally.
Exhibit 1
Key Events in Hoist's History
Hoist has typically entered new markets through portfolio acquisitions or partnerships with local players before making a full acquisition that includes local
offices
The core of Hoist’s business model revolves around acquiring overdue, unsecured consumer loans from financial institutions, with
net revenue from acquired loan portfolios accounting for 90% of total revenue over twelve months ending 31 March 2016. The
company's third party collection business is the main driver of the remaining revenue. At the end of March 2016, the book value of
Hoist’s acquired loan portfolio was SEK11.1 billion, with gross ERC of SEK19.2 billion at the same time.
In addition to Hoist, we rate four other debt purchasing companies in Europe: Arrow Global Group PLC (Arrow, corporate family rating
B1 Stable), Cabot Financial Ltd (Cabot, B2 Stable), Garfunkelux Holco 2 S.A. (GFKL-Lowell Group, B2 Stable), and Lock Lower Holdings
AS (Lindorff, B2 Ratings on review for downgrade). When we compare Hoist's intrinsic strength to its peers, we compare Hoist's BCA to
the corporate family ratings of peers. Exhibit 2 highlights key indicators for this group of rated debt purchasers: while Hoist is not the
largest rated debt purchaser in terms of total assets, it does have the largest portfolio of acquired loan portfolios. However, Hoist is less
profitable than its pure debt purchasing peers, Arrow and Cabot.
This publication does not announce a credit rating action. For any credit ratings referenced in this publication, please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on
www.moodys.com for the most updated credit rating action information and rating history.
2
7 July 2016
Hoist Kredit AB (publ): FAQ: Strong Deposit Base and Sound Capitalisation Drive Recent Upgrade
Exhibit 2
Key Indicators for Rated Debt Purchasers at end-2015
Hoist has a substantial loan portfolio, but generates modest return compared to some of the peers
Adjusted EBITDA is adjusted for loan portfolio amortisation. The net income of GFKL-Lowell Group is based on the 12 months that ended 30 June 2015 and represent the pro forma
combined net income of GFKL and Lowell. EUR/SEK: 9.16366; GBP/SEK: 12.4355
Source: Company reports, Moody's Investors Service, Oanda
For further information on the rated peers, see our sector analysis on European debt purchasing companies, Sector Maturity Drives
Consolidation and Business Diversification, published 6 April 2016.
Q2: Why is Hoist's standalone credit assessment higher than that of its peers?
Hoist has three noticeable strengths compared with peers: favourable funding structure, solid capitalisation, and strong liquidity
position. In addition, Hoist's geographical diversification and Hoist Finance's public listing positively affects our credit assessment.
The major difference between Hoist and its peers is the funding structure. Debt purchasing companies are typically highly dependant
on market funding, while Hoist is mainly financed through deposits (75% of total assets at the end of March 2016). This significant
proportion of deposits is a key rating strength, and translates into a higher standalone assessment because we consider deposits to
be a cheaper and more stable funding source than market funding. Even though we consider internet based deposits to more volatile
and less sticky than branche-originated deposits, we do not expect Hoist's deposit to be volatile given that 99% of Hoist's deposits
are guaranteed by the Swedish deposit guarantee scheme. Since starting origination in 2009, Hoist has shown a good track record of
retaining and growing its deposit base. Although we anticipate Hoist to increase the use of market funding, reducing the proportion of
deposit funding somewhat, we expect deposits to remain a significant funding source.
Hoist has a solid capital position compared to other rated debt purchasers because the company is regulated as a credit market
company, with capital requirements similar to banks. At the end of March 2016, Hoist reported a common equity Tier 1 (CET1) ratio
of 12.3%, well above its minimum CET1 ratio requirement of 7.0%, and tangible common equity (TCE) to total assets of 12.3%. Debt
purchasing peers do not report risk weighted assets, so we compare the leverage position of Hoist, relative to peers, using both tangible
common equity (TCE) to total assets and debt to earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA). However,
the rated peers, with exception of Arrow (TCE to total assets of 6.0% at end-2015), all report negative TCE because of large goodwill
positions.
When measuring leverage in terms of gross debt to adjusted EBITDA, Hoist reported a 5.0x multiple at 31 March 2016, down from
6.2x at the end of 2015, indicating comparable leverage with the asset weighted average of rated peers of 5.3x (see Exhibit 3). We also
note that Hoist's gross debt to EBITDA includes mainly deposits (0.5x when excluding deposits). We use gross debt instead of net debt
because the cash and liquidity on balance sheet could be restricted and not available for repaying debt. At the same time we note that
Hoist has larger liquidity reserves than peers, so the gross debt measurement is relatively punitive for Hoist.
3
7 July 2016
Exhibit 3
Gross Debt to EBITDA Ratios
Hoist has reduced its debt load relative to adjusted EBITDA over the past three years, while we see the opposite trend for peers
GFKL-Lowell Group's debt to EBITDA is calculated at 30 June 2015
Source: Company reports, Moody's Investors Service
A strong liquidity position provides flexibility and solid buffers in adverse market conditions. Hoist's liquid resources made up a
significant 30.3% of total assets at the end of March, sufficient for the company to cover 59.9% of on-demand deposits or 3.7 times
total non-deposit debt (see Exhibit 4). This provides security to debt holders in the event that there is a strong outflow of deposits or if
other funding dries up.
Exhibit 4
Hoist's Balance Sheet Structure at End-March 2016
The company's assets mainly consist of debt portfolios and liquidity, while its liabilities are dominated by deposits
Subordinated debt includes SEK 93 million of additional Tier 1 capital instruments
Hoist's geographical diversification positively contributes to its sounder intrinsic credit strength compared to peers. With the
exception of Lindorff, the other rated debt purchasers have a narrow geographical focus with above 75% of average revenues coming
from UK operations in 2015. While Hoist's largest single geographical exposure is to the UK, where it collected 33% of its revenues in
2015, remaining revenue was well diversified between its other markets.
Some peers (Lindorff and GFKL-Lowell Group) are private equity backed. We associate the acquisition and subsequent management
through private equity funds with increased risk because it typically implies high leverage, financial targets that are difficult to reach
without making structural and operational changes, and an owner whose ultimate goal is to sell the company. Compared to these
peers, we view Hoist's listing on Nasdaq OMX Stockholm as a positive factor because it implies that the company is subject to
4
7 July 2016
regulatory reporting requirements, which increases transparency, as well as more diverse ownership structure. It also enables Hoist to
raise capital through stock issuance.
Q3: How does Hoist's regulatory status impact the rating assessment?
Hoist is regulated by the SFSA as a credit market company. This implies that the company is subject to rules and regulations that are
similar to banks, including capital and liquidity requirements. Hoist is also required to report the same regulatory information as banks,
such as CET1 capital ratios. By following these regulations and by making relevant regulatory information available, Hoist is able to
accept deposits, the company's main funding source. However, Hoist does not have access to central bank funding and is not part of
Sweden's payment system.
We view being regulated as a credit market company as a credit strength for Hoist, because it implies closer regulatory oversight and
increased transparency compared to peers. The closer oversight suggests that the SFSA would be able to identify and intervene early in
the event that Hoist's solvency or liquidity is threatened.
While there has been increased regulatory pressure among European peers over the past few years, Hoist's regulatory scrutiny in
Sweden is different from what debt purchasers are subject to in other countries. For example in the UK, debt purchasing companies are
regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which focuses on the fair treatment of customers, while the SFSA applies a much
stronger oversight and stricter regulations to Hoist because it gathers retail deposits.
While positive overall, we note that the stricter-than-peer regulation leads to higher costs for Hoist compared to peers. It increases
the need for additional treasury and compliance functions, while also requiring the company to maintain a low risk and low yielding
liquidity portfolio (78% highly rated securities and 22% overnight deposits at the end of March 2016). Our ratings also account for
Hoist's lack of cental bank funding, which also partly explains the significant liquidity reserves, because the company does not have
immediate access to liquidity in a stressed scenario.
Q4: How does Moody's assess Hoist's asset risk?
For Hoist and the other above mentioned debt purchasers, we consider the key risks related to the portfolios of non-performing
receivables as (1) model risk in relation to the valuation and pricing of the purchased receivables; and (2) concentration risk with
regards to suppliers (i.e., debt originators). In addition, we also consider event risk arising from potential litigation or legislative actions.
For Hoist, the model and valuation risks are mitigated by the company's strong track record of pricing loan portfolios and its knowledge
of the NPL market as a debt collection agency, while its geographical spread somewhat mitigates the concentration in suppliers.1
The valuation of NPL portfolios is largely driven by the expected collections. We consider unemployment a key factor for the
success of collecting non-performing receivables and other unsecured lending. Although we note that unemployment in European
countries typically exhibit some correlation, Hoist's geographical diversification mitigates the risk of shocks to single economies. For
most of the countries where Hoist operates, we forecast reduced or stable unemployment levels over the next two years (see Exhibit
5). which positively impacts the asset risk assessment for Hoist, as well as peers operating in these countries.
5
7 July 2016
Exhibit 5
Unemployment Rates and Forecasts in Countries Hoist Operates
We expect unemployment to decline or remain stable in most countries where Hoist operates
Poland is not included in this table because we do not forecast unemployment in Poland
Source: Moody's Investors Service
We expect Hoist's high industry concentration from suppliers to continue going forward. Hoist acquires most of its NPL portfolios
from financial institutions (94% of the portfolio at the end of 2015), limiting its potential suppliers and making Hoist vulnerable to
available debt originators. While Hoist has good relationships with several international banks, this does not fully mitigate the risk that
the loss of an important customer might materially reduce Hoist's profitability. We also note that Hoist's industry concentration is
higher than most peers (see Exhibit 6), which negatively impacts our asset risk assessment for Hoist.
Exhibit 6
Breakdown of Debt Portfolios by Industry Source at End-2015
Hoist has one of the highest concentrations to financial services originated debt portfolios
Cabot and GFKL-Lowell Group shows split of acquired debt portfolios in 2015
As a mitigant to the significant concentration to financial institutions, we positively note that Hoist has one of the most geographically
diversified portfolios of NPLs among its peers (see Exhibit 7), which we consider a positive factor because it makes Hoist less vulnerable
to the economic environment of a single country.
6
7 July 2016
Exhibit 7
Geographical Distribution of Revenues in 2015
Hoist's geographical exposure is well diversified compared to most peers
For Hoist, Germany also includes Austria
Q5: Why is Hoist less profitable than peers?
Compared to other pure debt purchasing peers (Arrow and Cabot), Hoist is less profitable, as a result of the company's large liquidity
portfolio. While maturing markets will put profitability under further pressure going forward, Hoist's focus on deposit gathering
provides the company with a cheaper funding base.
In 2015, Hoist reported net income to total assets of 1.4%, compared to 4.7% for Arrow and 2.4% for Cabot (see Exhibit 8). Hoist's
relatively low profitability is largely driven by the company's large liquidity portfolio (30% of total assets), which generates a very
low return on assets, reflecting the low-risk investment profile needed to satisfy regulatory liquidity requirements for deposit taking
companies. While we expect the proportion of liquid assets on the balance sheet to decline somewhat going forward, as Hoist uses
excess liquidity to acquire debt portfolios in an attempt to boost profitability, low return on liquidity will continue to put downward
pressure on Hoist's profitability.
7
Exhibit 8
Exhibit 9
Net Income to Average Total Assets at end-2015
Adjusted EBITDA to Interest Expense for 2015 Fiscal Year
Hoist is less profitable than other pure debt purchasers...
...Hoist still exhibits strong interest coverage ratio
GFKL-Lowell Group's net income is based on the 12 months that ended 30 June 2015 and
represent the pro forma combined financials of GFKL and Lowell. In 2015, GFKL-Lowell
Group had a significant negative income statement impact following the completion of
the private equity backed merger between GFKL and Lowell in 2015. Prior to this, GFKL
exhibited strong profitability metrics
Source: Moody's, company reports
7 July 2016
In addition, prices on debt portfolios purchased from financial institutions are rising as markets become increasingly mature and
sophisticated, thus profitability on these portfolios is declining, impacting Hoist and peers. Some peers instead diversify their portfolio
by acquiring assets from sources other than financial institutions, thereby expanding into more asset classes and a wider group of debt
originators. While we note that financial institutions remain the main source of debt portfolios for all rated debt purchasers, we believe
Hoist's business model is less flexible than some peers in terms of acquiring portfolios from other sources.
Cheap deposit funding and relatively low interest rates on senior unsecured debt somewhat mitigate Hoist's weak profitability. The
company's most recent senior unsecured debt issuance consisted of €250 million in senior notes which mature in 3.5 years and carry
a fixed coupon of 3.125%, while Hoist's deposits are currently priced at 0.6% for floating rates and up to 1.5% interest rates for 3 year
fixed term deposits (at 30 June 2016). This contributes to Hoist's funding costs being lower than peers and enables the company to
have the highest interest coverage ratio (defined as adjusted EBITDA to interest expenses and preferred dividends) among its rated
peers, 6.3x in 2015, compared to asset weighted average for peers of 3.0x for the same period (see Exhibit 9). However, despite the low
funding cost, Hoist is unable to fully offset the negative pressure on its profitability stemming from the liquidity portfolio.
Q6: How does Hoist's recent EMTN issuance impact the expected loss for investors?
Hoist's liability structure reduces the expected loss to senior investors in the event that the company defaults by spreading losses
over a large number of investors, reflecting significant amounts of senior unsecured and subordinated debt. The company is based in
Sweden, which we consider to be an operational resolution regime (ORR) because it is subject to the European Union's Bank Recovery
and Resolution Directive (BRRD). In ORRs we analyse a company's liability structure to determine the amounts of pari passu and
subordinated liabilities to each debt category, which in turn leads to positive or negative rating uplift based on the expected loss
severity.
At the end of March, Hoist reported SEK986 million in senior unsecured debt, SEK338 million subordinated debt, and SEK93 million
additional Tier 1 securities, when combined corresponding to 8.3% of tangible banking assets. This translates into a likely moderate
loss to investors in a failure event. In May, Hoist issued €250 million senior unsecured debt, which we estimate to be around 12% of
tangible banking assets at time of issuance. The increased amount of senior unsecured debt will spread potential losses among a larger
investor base, thus reducing potential individual credit losses, and improving the credit profile of Hoist's senior unsecured notes. Exhibit
10 illustrates Hoist's liability structure before and after the debt issuance.
Exhibit 10
Development of Hoist's Liability Structure
Through the recent €250 million senior unsecured debt issuance, Hoist has increased the loss absorption provided to senior unsecured debt holders
June 2016 represents our estimated liability structure after the €250 million senior unsecured debt issuance and repurchase of €61.6 million and SEK99.0 million legacy senior unsecured
notes in June 2016
Exhibit 10 also shows a decline in the proportion of senior unsecured debt during the first quarter of 2016, which was driven by Hoist
repurchasing its own debt to facilitate the merger with its holding company Hoist Finance AB (publ). As bond holders of previously
issued senior unsecured debt will need to consent to the merger, the company was looking to reduce the outstanding legacy debt to
8
7 July 2016
mitigate the risk of delay stemming from non-consenting bond holders. For the same reason, the company completed a tender offer
to repurchase its outstanding senior unsecured notes. The tender was completed in June 2016 and resulted in Hoist repurchasing and
cancelling €61.6 million and SEK99 million outstanding senior unsecured notes, which were issued prior to May 2016.
9
7 July 2016
Peer Group:
»
Arrow Global Group PLC
»
Cabot Financial Ltd
»
Lock Lower Holdings AS
»
Garfunkelux Holdco 2 S.A.
Methodologies Used:
»
Banks, January 2016
»
Finance Companies, October 2015
Credit Opinions:
»
»
Arrow Global Group PLC
»
Cabot Financial Ltd
»
Lock Lower Holdings AS
»
Garfunkelux Holdco 2 S.A.
Moody's Related Research
»
Sector Maturity Drives Consolidation and Business Diversification, April 2016
»
UK Debt Purchasers: Peer Comparison, November 2013
To access any of these reports, click on the entry above. Note that these references are current as of the date of publication of this
report and that more recent reports may be available. All research may not be available to all clients.
10
7 July 2016
Endnotes
1 For more details, please see Hoist's most recent credit opinion, which can be accessed from Hoist's profile page on moodys.com.
11
7 July 2016
© 2016 Moody's Corporation, Moody's Investors Service, Inc., Moody's Analytics, Inc. and/or their licensors and affiliates (collectively, "MOODY'S"). All rights reserved.
CREDIT RATINGS ISSUED BY MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE, INC. AND ITS RATINGS AFFILIATES ("MIS") ARE MOODY'S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT
RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND RESEARCH PUBLICATIONS PUBLISHED BY MOODY'S ("MOODY'S
PUBLICATIONS") MAY INCLUDE MOODY'S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE
SECURITIES. MOODY'S DEFINES CREDIT RISK AS THE RISK THAT AN ENTITY MAY NOT MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL, FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AS THEY COME DUE AND ANY
ESTIMATED FINANCIAL LOSS IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET
VALUE RISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY'S OPINIONS INCLUDED IN MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT STATEMENTS OF CURRENT OR HISTORICAL
FACT. MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS MAY ALSO INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE MODEL-BASED ESTIMATES OF CREDIT RISK AND RELATED OPINIONS OR COMMENTARY PUBLISHED
BY MOODY'S ANALYTICS, INC. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIAL ADVICE, AND CREDIT
RATINGS AND MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. NEITHER CREDIT
RATINGS NOR MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FOR ANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY'S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS
AND PUBLISHES MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS WITH THE EXPECTATION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH INVESTOR WILL, WITH DUE CARE, MAKE ITS OWN STUDY AND
EVALUATION OF EACH SECURITY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE, HOLDING, OR SALE.
MOODY'S CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY RETAIL INVESTORS AND IT WOULD BE RECKLESS AND INAPPROPRIATE FOR
RETAIL INVESTORS TO USE MOODY'S CREDIT RATINGS OR MOODY'S PUBLICATIONS WHEN MAKING AN INVESTMENT DECISION. IF IN DOUBT YOU SHOULD CONTACT
YOUR FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVISER. ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COPYRIGHT LAW,
AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED
OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY
PERSON WITHOUT MOODY'S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT.
All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY'S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well
as other factors, however, all information contained herein is provided "AS IS" without warranty of any kind. MOODY'S adopts all necessary measures so that the information it
uses in assigning a credit rating is of sufficient quality and from sources MOODY'S considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third-party sources. However,
MOODY'S is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information received in the rating process or in preparing the Moody's Publications.
To the extent permitted by law, MOODY'S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability to any person or entity for any
indirect, special, consequential, or incidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any
such information, even if MOODY'S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers is advised in advance of the possibility of such losses or
damages, including but not limited to: (a) any loss of present or prospective profits or (b) any loss or damage arising where the relevant financial instrument is not the subject of a
particular credit rating assigned by MOODY'S.
To the extent permitted by law, MOODY'S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for any direct or compensatory
losses or damages caused to any person or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud, willful misconduct or any other type of liability that, for the
avoidance of doubt, by law cannot be excluded) on the part of, or any contingency within or beyond the control of, MOODY'S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents,
representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information.
NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH
RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY'S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER.
Moody's Investors Service, Inc., a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody's Corporation ("MCO"), hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including
corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by Moody's Investors Service, Inc. have, prior to assignment of any rating,
agreed to pay to Moody's Investors Service, Inc. for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,500 to approximately $2,500,000. MCO and MIS also maintain
policies and procedures to address the independence of MIS's ratings and rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and
rated entities, and between entities who hold ratings from MIS and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%, is posted annually at
www.moodys.com under the heading "Investor Relations — Corporate Governance — Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy."
Additional terms for Australia only: Any publication into Australia of this document is pursuant to the Australian Financial Services License of MOODY'S affiliate, Moody's Investors
Service Pty Limited ABN 61 003 399 657AFSL 336969 and/or Moody's Analytics Australia Pty Ltd ABN 94 105 136 972 AFSL 383569 (as applicable). This document is intended
to be provided only to "wholesale clients" within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. By continuing to access this document from within Australia, you
represent to MOODY'S that you are, or are accessing the document as a representative of, a "wholesale client" and that neither you nor the entity you represent will directly or
indirectly disseminate this document or its contents to "retail clients" within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. MOODY'S credit rating is an opinion as
to the creditworthiness of a debt obligation of the issuer, not on the equity securities of the issuer or any form of security that is available to retail investors. It would be reckless
and inappropriate for retail investors to use MOODY'S credit ratings or publications when making an investment decision. If in doubt you should contact your financial or other
professional adviser.
Additional terms for Japan only: Moody's Japan K.K. ("MJKK") is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody's Group Japan G.K., which is wholly-owned by Moody's
Overseas Holdings Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MCO. Moody's SF Japan K.K. ("MSFJ") is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of MJKK. MSFJ is not a Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organization ("NRSRO"). Therefore, credit ratings assigned by MSFJ are Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings. Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings are assigned by an
entity that is not a NRSRO and, consequently, the rated obligation will not qualify for certain types of treatment under U.S. laws. MJKK and MSFJ are credit rating agencies registered
with the Japan Financial Services Agency and their registration numbers are FSA Commissioner (Ratings) No. 2 and 3 respectively.
MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) hereby disclose that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred
stock rated by MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees
ranging from JPY200,000 to approximately JPY350,000,000.
MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements.
REPORT NUMBER 1025338
12
7 July 2016

Hoist Kredit AB (publ)

Transcription

Similar documents

CAT 797 Transmission Hoist

Demag DH hoist units (PDF | 1.4 MB )

absolute auction - Tritech Auctions, Inc.

The Board of Directors of Qatar Fuel (WOQOD) is pleased to invite

A Guide to Financial Fitness

Sr. Master Moody Bio

Suretech Solutions - Enterprise Ireland

York Citizens Advice Bureau – How did our advice help you?

The Shermanator - Accounting Las Vegas, NV

YJL Series Electric Chain Hoist

NAREIT Presentation June 9th and 10th, 2010

Annonce S1