Standards
Editorial standards
Every page here states what it can support and nothing more. Regulatory claims are taken from primary sources and linked to them, no track record is published because none can be verified, no ratings are emitted, and no rate card exists. Where a fact could not be confirmed, the page states the principle without the false precision.
Key takeaways
- Primary sources or nothing. Rule references and thresholds come from the rulebook, the statute or the regulator, and are linked. A number without a source does not get published.
- No history is claimed. There are no deal counts, no assets under management, no client names, no case studies and no testimonials, because none of them could be independently verified today.
- No ratings, deliberately. No aggregate rating or review markup appears anywhere on this site. On a finance site with no verifiable record, rating-ineligible is the honest state.
- The conflict is disclosed, not hidden. We are a capital provider writing about the structures we provide. Read the comparison pages knowing that.
- Signed, and dated. Explanatory pages carry a personal byline naming one of three principals, with the date the page was last reviewed; the trust pages are signed by the organisation, because a policy page is the firm speaking rather than a person.
- Unconfirmed figures are removed, not rounded. Where a primary text could not be read, the number comes out and the omission is recorded on this page instead of being filled with a plausible one.
Sourcing
Securities law and listing rules are the load-bearing content on this site, and both are precise. A wrong rule number on a page a chief financial officer reads before a board meeting is worse than no rule number, so the ordering below is applied literally.
| Rank | What it is | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| First | The rule, statute, form or rulebook itself | SEC.gov, the eCFR, an exchange rulebook, a national instrument |
| Second | The regulator's own guidance on that rule | Compliance guides, staff notices, exchange rule FAQs |
| Third | Filed documents that show the rule in use | Registration statements and offering documents on public filing systems |
| Support only | Professional commentary | Law-firm alerts and press coverage: useful for orientation, never the citation of record |
| Not published | Anything that cannot be linked | If the claim cannot be tied to a source, the page states the general principle instead |
Citations are given as links, and the links are live. Outbound links to regulators, exchanges, statutes and public filing systems are marked noopener and never nofollow: citing an authority and then withholding the link from it would be a strange way to demonstrate a claim. No outbound link here has been sold, exchanged or requested by the site it points at. Where this site links to globalrto.com, securitiesbackedlending.com, lombardfinancing.com or hkstockloans.com, those sites are published under common ownership with this one; the links are contextual, unpaid, and marked as such where they appear. The citation sits on the page making the claim rather than on one reference page, so a reader arriving from a search result can check that page without leaving it. Where the only authoritative text is in another language, the page links the official-language version rather than a convenient translation, and says which it is.
The market screen: what it is, and what it does not establish
The largest piece of original work here is the market directory, and it is research rather than a list of countries. Fifty-eight markets were put to one question: can a listed company there raise capital through a convertible priced by reference to future market prices, or through a standby equity facility drawn on its own demand? Each answer had to name the rule that decides it, and each rule had to come from a rulebook, a statute or a regulator under the hierarchy above. Every one of the 58 entries carries its own source list.
The screen was run in August 2026 and last reviewed on 18 August 2026; both dates are stamped in the file. It is published in full as a machine-readable screen file carrying the tier, the governing rule, the resale path, the sources and a confidence flag for every market, so the working can be inspected rather than taken on trust. The flag records how much of the underlying law was read in primary form. It is not a measure of commercial confidence, and it is the first thing to read on any market page.
| Flag | Markets | What it records |
|---|---|---|
| High | 9 | The governing rule was read in its own text, in the language it was enacted in |
| Medium | 30 | Corroborated across regulator guidance and professional summaries, but the consolidated text was not opened |
| Low | 19 | No national primary source was opened. Read the entry as a screen to be confirmed with local counsel, not as a finding |
| Screened August 2026. Current at the screening date only, and not legal advice. | ||
Two limits belong with it. Publishing a market page is not a claim that we can transact there: 46 of the 58 say in their own text that the structure is unavailable, or that it works only with a material modification. And a tier is a screen of a market, not an opinion on a particular issuer or instrument, which is what counsel in that jurisdiction is for.
Where a source could not be read
The last line of the hierarchy above does most of the work in practice: if a figure cannot be tied to a primary source it is not published, and the page states the principle without it. The alternative is a number that looks precise, gets quoted onward, and is wrong. An omission is invisible by definition, so the substantive ones are recorded here.
| Where | What is not printed | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Bangladesh | Every percentage in the private-placement and rights-tranche rules | The gazetted rules are scanned Bengali documents that would not extract as text |
| India | The cap on the discount a qualified institutional placement may carry | The consolidated regulations could not be reached. The page states that a capped discount exists, and why it does not change the verdict |
| Netherlands | The civil-code article numbers, the majority required and the maximum designation period | Book 2 of the Burgerlijk Wetboek was not read in primary form |
| Luxembourg | The article numbers of the Law of 10 August 1915 | The statute was not opened, so the page marks which statements are architectural rather than cited |
| Kuwait | A minimum nominal value per share | Single-sourced, and the same summary said later amendments had removed the minimum. The closed verdict does not rest on it |
| Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Iceland | Nothing withheld; the verdict itself is marked provisional | Each records the absence of a located rule, not a located restriction, and says so on the page |
| An entry leaves this table when the primary text has been read, not when a plausible figure turns up elsewhere. | ||
The same rule is applied to this site's own facts. The publisher's registered name, its jurisdiction of incorporation and its registered office are stated on the legal notice and on the privacy notice; where a detail about this firm cannot yet be stated in the same way a rulebook citation can, it is left out rather than approximated.
Who signs these pages, and who reviews them
Every explanatory page is signed, with the date it was published and the date it was last reviewed. Most of them carry a personal byline naming one of the three principals set out on the about page: the PIPE and registered direct pages, the instruments and Rule 144 pages, and the market directory each have a name against them. This page, the about page, the frequently asked questions and the glossary stay signed By Issuer Financing, because a policy page is the firm speaking rather than a person. The homepage, the contact page and the legal notices carry no byline, because none of them carries an explanation that could go stale.
Review is an organisational process and is not separately attributed. A page is checked against the primary sources in its own citation list before publication, and again when a rule it depends on moves. There is no editorial board and no second reviewer signing off behind the byline, and neither has been invented to fill the space: the byline names the person answerable for the copy, and the publisher is answerable for all of it. The last reviewed date moves with the revision, and is published in machine-readable form as well as visible text. Where a regulatory position is known to be in flux, the page says so rather than presenting a moving figure as settled.
A byline names the person answerable for the page, and nothing more is claimed by it. Each entry on the about page states a role and the decisions that sit with it on a transaction, and then stops: no former employers, no qualifications, no years of experience and no photographs. A role and the decisions attached to it are what bear on a financing; the rest is decoration, and this site does not publish it about anybody. The same restraint governs the firm: what it does, and what it does not do, is stated plainly and is not dressed up with a track record no reader could test.
What we deliberately do not publish
No deal counts, no capital deployed, no client names, no logos, no testimonials, no case studies, no years in business and no awards. No rating or review markup. No published discount, interest rate or fee schedule, because pricing depends on the float, the traded volume, the instrument and the resale route, and a published number would be a fiction. No promise about timing or outcome: the availability of a resale route depends on counsel, the transfer agent and the regulator, none of which we control.
Independence and the commercial interest
This site carries no advertising, no sponsored content, no affiliate links and no paid placement. It is published by a capital provider, and the pages describe structures that provider offers, which is a real conflict and is stated here rather than buried. Comparison pages such as PIPE versus registered direct are written to be useful even to an issuer who goes elsewhere, and the compliance limits on this site apply to them equally.
Anything that reads like advice is not. Nothing on the site is investment, legal, accounting or tax advice, and no broker-dealer or investment-advisory service is provided or held out. The detail is set out in the legal notice.
How this site is funded
By the publisher, and by nothing else. There is no advertising revenue, no sponsorship, no affiliate arrangement, no paid placement and no sale of enquiries. Nothing published here is charged for. The publisher's return, where there is one, arises from securities it subscribes for as an investor, which is why the conflict above is worth stating twice. The ownership of the publishing entity is not published on this site; the publisher is named, with its registered office, on the legal notice.
Corrections
Send corrections to info@issuerfinancing.com, ideally with the page, the sentence and a source. A correction does not have to come from a client or a lawyer to be acted on.
A substantive correction is made on the page itself, the last reviewed date moves, and the corrected page says what changed rather than reading as though it had always said the new thing. Typographical fixes are made silently; factual ones are not. Where a claim can no longer be supported it is removed and the removal is described, which is what the table above is for. A correction touching the market screen is applied to the published screen file in the same pass, so the page and the data cannot drift apart.
Page-level corrections made since this site was written are dated in the corrections and revisions log.
General information, not legal advice. Everything published on this site describes securities-law, listing-rule and settlement concepts in general terms. It is not a substitute for advice from qualified securities counsel in the relevant jurisdiction, and no reader should act on a page here without that advice.
Editorial standards: frequently asked questions
Who writes and reviews these pages?
Three principals are named on the about page, and most explanatory pages carry one of their bylines: the PIPE and registered direct pages, the instruments and Rule 144 pages, and the 58-market directory each have a name against them. This page, the about page, the frequently asked questions and the glossary stay signed by the organisation, because a policy page is the firm speaking rather than a person. Review is not separately attributed: the byline names the person answerable for the copy, and the publisher is answerable for all of it.
What counts as a source here?
The rule, statute, form or rulebook itself, then the regulator's own guidance on it, then filed documents. Law-firm commentary and press coverage are used for orientation and are not cited as authority. If a claim cannot be linked to a primary source, the page states the general principle instead of a specific number.
How was the 58-market screen put together?
Fifty-eight markets were put to one question: whether a listed company there can raise capital through a convertible priced by reference to future market prices, or through a standby equity facility. Each verdict has to name the rule that decides it, taken from a rulebook, a statute or a regulator under the hierarchy above. The whole screen, with sources and a confidence flag for every market, is published as a machine-readable file alongside the directory.
Why do some pages leave out a number that other sites print?
Because the number could not be tied to a primary source. Where a gazetted text would not extract, a consolidated regulation could not be reached or a statute was never opened, the figure comes out and the page states the principle instead. The substantive omissions are listed on this page rather than left invisible, and a figure goes back only once the primary text has been read.
How do I report an error?
Email info@issuerfinancing.com with the page, the sentence, and the source that contradicts it if you have one. Substantive corrections are made to the page and the last reviewed date is updated. Nothing is quietly deleted: where a claim was wrong, the corrected page says what changed.
Do you accept payment for coverage, links or placement?
No. There is no advertising, no sponsored content, no affiliate link and no paid placement anywhere on this site. The commercial interest is stated plainly instead: we are a capital provider describing structures we ourselves offer, which is a conflict worth knowing about when you read a comparison.
If this is about a live situation
This page describes how the content is sourced. If you are checking us before sending anything, the legal notice sets out the limits and the about page sets out the role.