RX Interview Question: Structural Subordination

Say we have a HoldCo with $0 in assets and $200 in liabilities ($100 senior debt and $100 junior debt). In addition, that parent has an OpCo with $200 in assets and $200 in liabilities ($100 senior debt and $100 junior debt). The OpCo also has an upstream guarantee for the HoldCo's debt.

What would the debt waterfall look like? Do both of the HoldCo's debt obligations get paid off, or do the senior debt obligations from HoldCo and OpCo get paid off?

 

This is wrong. Dont reply if you don't know the answer. The purpose of the question is literally to test understanding of structural subordination so that might give you a hint that just paying off "senior" debt first is the wrong answer. Order of priority is 1 senior opco debt, 2 junior opco debt, 3 senior holdco debt, then 4 junior holdco debt. Also a guarantee is a weaker claim than a lien.

 

To expand a bit you also need to consider secured versus unsecured since senior and junior really are incomplete descriptions. If the junior opco debt is unsecured, in bankruptcy it would be pari to all other unsecured claims including the guarantees from the holdco debt unless there is some intercreditor agreement stating the contrary. However, presumably the junior opco debt holders aren't going to allow the holdco debt holders to split proceeds and would demand either a secured claim (2nd lien) or an intercreditor with the holdco debt stating that the opco debt gets priority payment.

 

Obviously it's going to come down to the specific debt documents, but a guarantee claim is not by nature subordinated to a direct claim on the company's assets; there is such a thing as a secured guarantee and a subordinated lien.  The phrasing seems to apply that all of this debt is unsecured, so there is no lien against the company's assets, just a general claim.  A senior guarantee>a junior claim.  Many bankruptcy cases where a senior guarantee is getting paid before a subordinated note because each guarantor is jointly and severably liable.  

 

Not sure why this is getting  MS'd. The guarantee of holdcos debt by opco is removing the effects of structure. That said, if there are some holdco assets like some residual cash, you could get holdco debt recovering above opco.

Also, more for the benefit of the thread (judging by your other answers, seems like you know this) while it doesn't matter for this problem, would still advise drawing out the balance sheet and taking the intermediate step of allocating pro rata before accounting for subordination. It'll matter if your interviewer decides to change opco/holdco assets or debt sizes.

 

Maybe wrong here but if the guarantee assumes that the guaranteed liabilities become senior unsecured claims - wouldn't that mean both holdco senior and junior debt get treated equally in receiving value from the opco? Their seniority refers to the order of payment from the issuer, not from the guarantor. So wouldn't the breakdown be holdco senior, opco senior, and opco junior all take pro rata shares from the senior unsecured pool of claims, and then the junior debt come after? 

 
Most Helpful

I think for this type of question, it's okay to ask for a little bit more information. The term "junior" isn't enough to answer the question. It implies some level of subordination, but the question is what exactly is everything subordinated to. Moreover, as the question is worded, there's no reason to think that the guarantee of HoldCo's debt by OpCo is subordinated to anything. I also would advise drawing the structure out on a piece of paper with a mini-balance sheet for each entity: Here is how I would answer this question:

  • "Just to clarify a couple of points before I answer the question:"
    • "Is the OpCo jr. debt only subordinated to the OpCo sr. debt?"
    • "And is the HoldCo jr. debt only subordinated to the HoldCo sr. debt?"
    • "Can I assume that the guarantee of the HoldCo sr. and jr. debt sits pari with other claims against OpCo?" 
  • If all of those are the case:
  • Draw two boxes for HoldCo and OpCo
    • OpCo
      • Assets on the left side
        • $200 of assets on the left side of the box
        • Technically a right of repayment against HoldCo that you don't need to draw
      • Claims against OpCo on the right side of the box are:
        • $100 OpCo Snr. debt
        • $200 HoldCo debt guarantee
        • $100 OpCo jr. debt
        • $400 Total Claims
        • Residual Equity Claim below
    • HoldCo
      • Assets on the left side
        • OpCo Equity
          • Leave value blank for now
      • Claims against HoldCo on right side
        • $100 HoldCo snr. debt
        • $100 HoldCo jr. debt
        • $200 Total Claims
        • Below this is technically a subordinated OpCo right of subrogation/repayment that you don't need to draw
  • "First I'd look at the claims at the operating company level"
    •  To begin with, prior to accounting for subordination, all of these claims are pari passu, unsecured and receive a pro-rata recovery
      • $200 of assets divided by $400 of total claims implies a 50% recovery prior to subordination
        • So prior to subordination $ recoveries are:
          • $50 OpCo sr. debt
          • $100 HoldCo debt guarantee
          • $50 OpCo jr. debt
      • Nothing left for equity so no recovery there
        • Implying HoldCo has no value and the claims against it are worthless
    • Accounting for subordination
      • OpCo jr. debt turns over all $ recovery until OpCo sr. debt is made whole
        • OpCo sr. debt receives the $50 from the OpCo jr. debt to recover par leaving nothing for OpCo jr. debt
      • HoldCo jr. debt turns over all $ recovery until HoldCo sr. debt is made whole
        • HoldCo sr. debt receives the $50 from the HoldCo jr. debt to recover par leaving nothing for HoldCo jr. debt
  • Summing up
    • HoldCo snr. debt $100, 100% recovery
    • OpCo snr. debt $100, 100% recovery
    • HoldCo jr. debt 0%
    • OpCo jr. debt 0%
 

See my reply to his comment. I think he's right and with the numbers in the question, my analysis doesn't matter. That said, put the model into excel for yourself and play with the numbers, you'll see that if you change some of the claim sizes, its not so simple. So people could be MSing his approach to the problem or just not understand it themselves

 

Seems like some misinformation here. I agree with most that you should ask clarification questions. Here are the various permutations of possible correct answers

1) Senior Debt: Could be a 1L or unsecured

2) Junior Debt: Could be a 2L or have an intercreditor agreement that subordinates its to the unsecured senior debt

3) Guarantee: Unsecured or secured by a 1L 

In all the instances above, the former seems like a more reasonable assumption in the absence of a clarification. If thats the case then the OpCo debt is likely to recover in full and the HoldCo debt is likely to recover nothing

The later of the above produces a more complicated answer 

 

Illum labore non modi nostrum est voluptatem. Et ipsum consequatur et quisquam voluptatem sit consectetur quis. Omnis ut sunt ratione quam cumque consectetur asperiores. Delectus corporis magnam sunt fuga at consequatur modi.

Iste aut doloribus enim minima voluptatem occaecati corporis non. Quae optio tempora nostrum et accusamus in maxime. Libero exercitationem iusto quo nostrum.

Doloremque commodi eveniet odit perspiciatis et provident quasi. Asperiores sit nemo est quam. Alias animi vel dolor optio iste quam. Quos incidunt eum quia possimus molestias qui sint. Ea qui adipisci enim quia repellendus.

Nesciunt nesciunt inventore soluta minima. Sequi rerum perferendis sit ea sapiente. Odit veritatis iure et id. Quis quisquam cupiditate optio natus quisquam. Eaque repudiandae rerum occaecati cupiditate nihil sit. Numquam enim inventore quibusdam dicta. Et et dolor illo qui.

Career Advancement Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
  • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
  • Harris Williams & Co. New 98.3%
  • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
  • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
  • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
  • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
  • William Blair 03 97.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
  • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
  • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
  • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
  • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

Total Avg Compensation

April 2024 Investment Banking

  • Director/MD (5) $648
  • Vice President (19) $385
  • Associates (87) $260
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (14) $181
  • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
  • 2nd Year Analyst (66) $168
  • 1st Year Analyst (205) $159
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (146) $101
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
3
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
99.0
4
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
5
kanon's picture
kanon
98.9
6
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
7
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
8
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
9
bolo up's picture
bolo up
98.8
10
numi's picture
numi
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”