Talk:Banker's acceptance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Economics Low‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Title

Can someone change the title from Bankers' acceptance to a Banker's Acceptance ( I don't know how). The term is an actual term of art for a financial instrument. It should not be in plural possessive form. RVRLaw (talk) 02:18, 14 May 2011 (UTC)RVRLAW[reply]

Question

T-bills sell at a discount from par value

What does this mean? The par value of what? The T-bill?--Jerryseinfeld 15:38, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yes it is the face value(or PAR value) of the T-Bill.

Banker's acceptance vs. Commercial paper

It seems that they are almost same, however, Banker's acceptance was ganranteed by a banker. Is it true? I mean the article is not well-organized since it was not categorized, and it was not compared to other money market securities. I think that at least we can categorize the content into 3 categories: the reason (why does it exist), interest rate convention, its features (compared to other money market securities).

Furthermore, banker's acceptance is contrast to importer's acceptance. Once a time draft is "accepted", it becomes a note or a bond.

Jackzhp 00:52, 24 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Typical financial gobbledygook and contradictions

"The bank accepts the draft and discounts it; that is, it gives the importer cash for the draft but gives it an amount less than the face value of the draft. The importer uses the proceeds to pay the exporter". This makes it sound as if Banker's Acceptance is a kind of a loan.

That contradicts what is mentioned in the section titled "Comparison with other drafts", which makes it sound as if BAs are a kind of a Cashier's check.

They are discounted when sold in the secondary market early. Rather than wait 270 days to get the money, the importer can get the money earlier by selling the BA in the secondary market, but will have to discount it (take less to get money early). The purchaser of the BA in the secondary market gets full value at maturity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.13.103.179 (talk) 23:15, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How many banks?

"A banker's acceptance, or BA, is a negotiable instrument or time draft drawn on and accepted by a bank. Before acceptance, the draft is not an obligation of the bank; it is merely an order by the drawer to the bank to pay a specified sum of money on a specified date to a named person or to the bearer of the draft. Upon acceptance, which occurs when an authorized bank accepts and signs it, the draft becomes a primary and unconditional liability of the bank. If the bank is well known and enjoys a good reputation, the accepted draft may be readily sold in an active market. A banker's acceptance is also a money market instrument – a short-term discount instrument that usually arises in the course of international trade."

Is the authorized bank the same bank as the original bank upon whom the acceptance was drawn, or is it corresponding bank of the original bank, or may it be either of these two cases? The paragraph is ambiguous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomas Keyes (talk • contribs) 19:17, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Keyes 23 April 2009

Perhaps these need to be cleaned up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.214.3.207 (talk) 16:52, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]