Nymex considers lawsuit against Optionable
The New York Mercantile Exchange (Nymex) may take legal action against Valhalla, NY-based brokerage firm Optionable, the exchange’s chief executive officer James Newsome announced this week.
Last Thursday, Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer, a New York law firm, filed a class action suit on behalf of Optionable's stockholders, after the news broke of Optionable's involvement in massive commodity losses by the Bank of Montreal (BMO).
Nymex paid approximately $27 million for a 19% stake in Optionable on April 10, and acquired warrants of up to 40% in the firm. Two weeks later, its biggest customer (BMO) reported C$680 million pre-tax commodity trading losses, causing Optionable shares to nosedive. BMO has since suspended its business relationship with the brokerage and is investigating the extent of its involvement in the recent commodity trading losses. Nymex resigned its representation on the board on April 14, stating it was “actively reviewing the situation” and aims to “avoid potential conflict of interest during our review.”
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
Can the US FRTB revamp make the IMA great again?
Banks are finally presented with a viable internal models framework under Basel III’s market risk rules
UK rethinking tougher capital rules for US bank subsidiaries
US endgame draft would trigger UK Basel III trap floor for foreign banks, but PRA is reviewing
EBA proposes drastic overhaul to supervisory data reporting
Revamp will cut back the number of datapoints and integrate overlapping reports
CFTC wants to regulate prediction markets. Is it up to the task?
Former officials echo state gambling authorities’ concerns over agency’s ability to police betting risks
EBA seeks to allay Simm divergence concerns
EU validator pledges to co-ordinate with global regulators, but retains ability to act alone “if needed”
FRTB models find salvation in US Basel III proposal
Changes to P&L attribution test and NMRFs make IMA viable for US banks, risk managers say
US blows the floors off Basel III
Barr criticises “downward deviations” in US rule; Bowman rejects “blind adherence” to global standards
Basel III endgame – a timeline
A review of Risk.net’s coverage of the US implementation saga