# kaal:claim:1908473-027

**Claim.** Conversion at the first trigger under this proposal lacks the finality of Coffee's design, because it does not necessarily hand the institution to creditors unless the firm deteriorates further.

**Type.** design  **Support.** argued

**Source quote.**

> The conversion following the first trigger does not have the same finality as that in Coffee's proposal; it does not necessarily mean that creditors will take over the institution, unless it further deteriorates.

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, Christoph Henkel, *Contingent Capital with Sequential Triggers* (2011), IV.A. First Trigger: Debt-Equity Conversion, page 36

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, Christoph Henkel, Contingent Capital with Sequential Triggers (2011). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1908473

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `9d578dac663357529edd1f6453fcfe69bdc59ac882408d9edfde5a4c2916befa` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20and%20Henkel%20-%202011%20-%20Contingent%20Capital%20with%20Sequential%20Triggers.pdf

**Topics.** contingent-capital

**Keywords.** conversion, creditor-control, sequential-triggers, coffee-proposal

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.